[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Bob McGraw]

Only needs to done once per band unless the noise source really 
changes.   Of course the contest guys are changing bands every 3 
milliseconds, so that might be a chore.


73

Bob, K4TAX

On 12/16/2021 4:19 PM, elecraft-requ...@mailman.qth.net wrote:

Message: 8
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 11:52:54 -0700
From: David Gilbert
To:elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction
Message-ID:<104029f2-7c47-ebca-3e8b-d3bf3015a...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed



I applaud the persistence it must have taken you to come up with that
procedure, but it's actually kind of amusing to think about repeatedly
doing all of that during a contest.

73,
Dave?? AB7E



On 12/15/2021 9:52 AM, Bob McGraw wrote:

The approach I use for the Noise Blanker is this.

I first activate the NB and then the Level.?? I start with the DSP OFF
and the IF OFF.? I then adjust the DSP value for optimum results
without it destroying the quality of the signal.? DO MAKE A NOTE OF
THIS VALUE.? Then set the DSP back to OFF.? Then move to the IF and
scroll through the settings in an effort to find optimum results.?
Once this is done, leave the IF value as determined and return to the
DSP and set it to the value previously determined.

This works for a given band and given type of noise.? Change bands or
noise and do it all again.? There is no ONE setting correct for every
condition. ? Right now my 6M noise buzz is S-7 with the NB off.? Then
turning it ON and adjusted as above the 6M noise is S-3.? That's 4 S
units or 24 dB improvement.? I doubt you will get much better than this.

As to Noise Reduction, I find it best performs for CW mode. Again it
takes careful adjustment to obtain optimum results.?? I don't use NR
for SSB signals. I prefer to adjust the Attenuation value and the RF
Gain to produce optimum results when operating SSB.?? I find optimum
results occur when the no signal band noise is about 10 dB above the
receiver noise floor.?? In order to accomplish this operating point,
one will need to use ATTENUATION and RF Gain reduction.?? More gain
won't aid in receiving weak signals, but just the opposite, as the
signal will pop out of the noise.

I generally find using either NB or NR, but not both, is the better
way to operate.? I doubt there is anything wrong with your radio.?
Most likely the result is more related to receiver setting parameters.

73

Bob, K4TAX

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Bob Schwerdlin]

For me, the best noise blanker was on my old Drake R4C.  That thing 
worked GREAT!


Bob, WG9L


On 12/15/2021 1:14 PM, Fred Jensen wrote:
I find both the NB and NR on my K3 to be moderately underwhelming, not 
sure why.  Ignition noise used to predominate in urban and suburban 
areas and blankers like the one in the 75A4 were very effective.  I 
don't know what Detroit did, but I haven't heard ignition noise in 
years.  A general rule of thumb has always been to use blanking in 
wider bandwidths which sort of makes sense I guess ... the blanking 
pulses consume a smaller fraction of the overall signal passband.  My 
understanding of the K3 NR is that the DSP processor tries to build a 
matched filter around the signal on the fly.  It may be a bit too much 
for the algorithms, I've never had much success with it on broader 
noise such as power mains hash.  Backing off the RF gain seems to be 
more effective.


The best noise reduction I've ever encountered was on the receivers in 
the transportable AN/TRC-96 2.5 KW HF ISB system back in the 60's.  3 
voice channels and 16 TTY channels on the 4th. Don't remember the mfr 
and don't know how they did it but you could literally make noise 
disappear with minimal effects on the signals.


73,

Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

Jim Brown wrote on 12/15/2021 10:16 AM:
Lots of good advice here. A major problem with the K3 NB is the way 
it is described on screen and in the manual. There are two blankers, 
one ahead of the crystal roofing filters, one after them. Each has 
multiple tweaks. In contest conditions, I've found good noise 
reduction from using the one AFTER the roofing filter, and set for 
the greatest depth and shortest time. I THINK it's called the DSP 
Blanker.


Yes, by their nature, NBs will modulate signals by the noise.

Let's hope the NB in the K4 is better.

73, Jim K9YC







__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Victor Rosenthal]

I agree. I once suggested to Wayne that Elecraft charge something for
feature upgrades after a certain point in order to provide a revenue stream
to justify them. I received a chewing out unmatched since I got caught
driving a jeep without a helmet. This is not part of the Elecraft
philosophy.
As a result, like all the other manufacturers, there comes a time when the
answer has to be "buy a K4."

Victor 4X6GP

On Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 22:13 Nate Bargmann  wrote:

> * On 2021 15 Dec 10:03 -0600, Ray wrote:
> > I am Not a big fan of the K3 Noise reduction !
> > NB work OK, but NR is Poor!
>
> Sadly, I must agree and this is probably the most glaring deficiency in
> an otherwise stellar radio.  Fortunately, where I live now I am able to
> control the noise for the most part unless the electric fence gets an
> arc and then that needs to be tracked down anyway.
>
> I had hopes that work on improving the NR would continue but it is
> apparent the K3 is now an abandoned radio in league with many others.
> :-(
>
> 73, Nate, N0NB
>
> --
> "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
> possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
> Web: https://www.n0nb.us
> Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
> GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to k2vco@gmail.com
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[john]

I have contested from several locations with noise issues and I have also
not been able to find a NB/NR setting on my K3S that offers any improvement.

John KK9A


David Hachadorian  k6ll wrote:

For 12 years I've tried to get any enhancement of s/n from the K3 IF/RF 
NB and NR.  I haven't seen one case where there is any improvement under 
contest conditions.  When the s/n just starts to improve, the desired 
signal is modulated and degraded by nearby signals to the point where 
reception is better with NB/NR turned off.  As far as I can see, both of 
these features are useless on the K3 under contest conditions.

Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
Yuma, AZ

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Drew AF2Z]

On the K3 I use AFX BIN mode (stereo speakers) which really cuts the 
background noise to my perception.


Whatever other NR the K4 will have I hope there is an AFX binaural mode 
also.


73,
Drew
AF2Z



On 12/15/21 15:11, Nate Bargmann wrote:

* On 2021 15 Dec 10:03 -0600, Ray wrote:

I am Not a big fan of the K3 Noise reduction !
NB work OK, but NR is Poor!


Sadly, I must agree and this is probably the most glaring deficiency in
an otherwise stellar radio.  Fortunately, where I live now I am able to
control the noise for the most part unless the electric fence gets an
arc and then that needs to be tracked down anyway.

I had hopes that work on improving the NR would continue but it is
apparent the K3 is now an abandoned radio in league with many others.
:-(

73, Nate, N0NB


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Nate Bargmann]

* On 2021 15 Dec 10:03 -0600, Ray wrote:
> I am Not a big fan of the K3 Noise reduction !
> NB work OK, but NR is Poor!

Sadly, I must agree and this is probably the most glaring deficiency in
an otherwise stellar radio.  Fortunately, where I live now I am able to
control the noise for the most part unless the electric fence gets an
arc and then that needs to be tracked down anyway.

I had hopes that work on improving the NR would continue but it is
apparent the K3 is now an abandoned radio in league with many others.
:-(

73, Nate, N0NB

-- 
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."
Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Jim Brown]

On 12/15/2021 10:52 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
I applaud the persistence it must have taken you to come up with that 
procedure, but it's actually kind of amusing to think about repeatedly 
doing all of that during a contest.


If you know what you're doing, it can be done in a minute or two. I 
managed to change my settings from optimized for 6M to optimized for the 
10M contest in about half a minute.


73, Jim K9YC
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Fred Jensen]

I find both the NB and NR on my K3 to be moderately underwhelming, not 
sure why.  Ignition noise used to predominate in urban and suburban 
areas and blankers like the one in the 75A4 were very effective.  I 
don't know what Detroit did, but I haven't heard ignition noise in 
years.  A general rule of thumb has always been to use blanking in wider 
bandwidths which sort of makes sense I guess ... the blanking pulses 
consume a smaller fraction of the overall signal passband.  My 
understanding of the K3 NR is that the DSP processor tries to build a 
matched filter around the signal on the fly.  It may be a bit too much 
for the algorithms, I've never had much success with it on broader noise 
such as power mains hash.  Backing off the RF gain seems to be more 
effective.


The best noise reduction I've ever encountered was on the receivers in 
the transportable AN/TRC-96 2.5 KW HF ISB system back in the 60's.  3 
voice channels and 16 TTY channels on the 4th.  Don't remember the mfr 
and don't know how they did it but you could literally make noise 
disappear with minimal effects on the signals.


73,

Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

Jim Brown wrote on 12/15/2021 10:16 AM:
Lots of good advice here. A major problem with the K3 NB is the way it 
is described on screen and in the manual. There are two blankers, one 
ahead of the crystal roofing filters, one after them. Each has 
multiple tweaks. In contest conditions, I've found good noise 
reduction from using the one AFTER the roofing filter, and set for the 
greatest depth and shortest time. I THINK it's called the DSP Blanker.


Yes, by their nature, NBs will modulate signals by the noise.

Let's hope the NB in the K4 is better.

73, Jim K9YC





--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[David Gilbert]

I applaud the persistence it must have taken you to come up with that 
procedure, but it's actually kind of amusing to think about repeatedly 
doing all of that during a contest.


73,
Dave   AB7E



On 12/15/2021 9:52 AM, Bob McGraw wrote:

The approach I use for the Noise Blanker is this.

I first activate the NB and then the Level.   I start with the DSP OFF 
and the IF OFF.  I then adjust the DSP value for optimum results 
without it destroying the quality of the signal.  DO MAKE A NOTE OF 
THIS VALUE.  Then set the DSP back to OFF.  Then move to the IF and 
scroll through the settings in an effort to find optimum results.  
Once this is done, leave the IF value as determined and return to the 
DSP and set it to the value previously determined.


This works for a given band and given type of noise.  Change bands or 
noise and do it all again.  There is no ONE setting correct for every 
condition.   Right now my 6M noise buzz is S-7 with the NB off.  Then 
turning it ON and adjusted as above the 6M noise is S-3.  That's 4 S 
units or 24 dB improvement.  I doubt you will get much better than this.


As to Noise Reduction, I find it best performs for CW mode. Again it 
takes careful adjustment to obtain optimum results.   I don't use NR 
for SSB signals. I prefer to adjust the Attenuation value and the RF 
Gain to produce optimum results when operating SSB.   I find optimum 
results occur when the no signal band noise is about 10 dB above the 
receiver noise floor.   In order to accomplish this operating point, 
one will need to use ATTENUATION and RF Gain reduction.   More gain 
won't aid in receiving weak signals, but just the opposite, as the 
signal will pop out of the noise.


I generally find using either NB or NR, but not both, is the better 
way to operate.  I doubt there is anything wrong with your radio.  
Most likely the result is more related to receiver setting parameters.


73

Bob, K4TAX


On 12/15/2021 9:46 AM, elecraft-requ...@mailman.qth.net wrote:

Message: 15
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:36:26 -0500
From: Pete Smith N4ZR
To: Elecraft List
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud
line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south.? I
tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and was
unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.? With the noise
blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only was the
buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on the band
were being hum-modulated.? As soon as I turned off the noise blanker,
the CW signals cleaned up.? Is there something wrong with my radio, or
an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too strong??
Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not there all the
time, so that could be tough.

-- 73, Pete N4ZR Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network web server 
at <http://beta.reversebeacon.net>. For spots, please use your 
favorite "retail" DX cluster. -- Message: 
16 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 06:55:25 -0800 From: Dave  
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise 
Reduction Message-ID:  
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed I have that 
same issue... I have some very dirty grow lights about two blocks 
from me. They are dirty as they come... Splattering across 80-20 
meters. The K3 has never been able to adequately clean up the crud 
from them. In defense of the NB/NR on the K3, the signals are on the 
order of S7 to S9, so my expectations may be too high for the K3. I 
just hope the K4 NB/NR work better in my environment. 73, and thanks, 
Dave (NK7Z) https://www.nk7z.net ARRL Volunteer Examiner ARRL 
Technical Specialist, RFI ARRL Asst. Director, NW Division, Technical 
Resources --

Message: 17
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 08:05:59 -0700
From: David Hachadorian
To: Pete Smith N4ZR,    Reflector Elecraft

Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

For 12 years I've tried to get any enhancement of s/n from the K3 IF/RF
NB and NR.? I haven't seen one case where there is any improvement under
contest conditions.? When the s/n just starts to improve, the desired
signal is modulated and degraded by nearby signals to the point where
reception is better with NB/NR turned off.? As far as I can see, both of
these features are useless on the K3 under contest conditions.

Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
Yuma, AZ





__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://w

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[David Gilbert]

Anybody know if they are less useless on the K4?

73,
Dave   AB7E


On 12/15/2021 8:05 AM, David Hachadorian wrote:
For 12 years I've tried to get any enhancement of s/n from the K3 
IF/RF NB and NR.  I haven't seen one case where there is any 
improvement under contest conditions.  When the s/n just starts to 
improve, the desired signal is modulated and degraded by nearby 
signals to the point where reception is better with NB/NR turned off.  
As far as I can see, both of these features are useless on the K3 
under contest conditions.


Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
Yuma, AZ


On 12/15/2021 7:36 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud 
line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south. I 
tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and 
was unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.  With the 
noise blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only 
was the buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on 
the band were being hum-modulated.  As soon as I turned off the noise 
blanker, the CW signals cleaned up.  Is there something wrong with my 
radio, or an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too 
strong?  Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not 
there all the time, so that could be tough.


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Jim Brown]

Lots of good advice here. A major problem with the K3 NB is the way it 
is described on screen and in the manual. There are two blankers, one 
ahead of the crystal roofing filters, one after them. Each has multiple 
tweaks. In contest conditions, I've found good noise reduction from 
using the one AFTER the roofing filter, and set for the greatest depth 
and shortest time. I THINK it's called the DSP Blanker.


Yes, by their nature, NBs will modulate signals by the noise.

Let's hope the NB in the K4 is better.

73, Jim K9YC

 On 12/15/2021 8:52 AM, Bob McGraw wrote:

The approach I use for the Noise Blanker is this.

I first activate the NB and then the Level.   I start with the DSP OFF 
and the IF OFF.  I then adjust the DSP value for optimum results without 
it destroying the quality of the signal.  DO MAKE A NOTE OF THIS VALUE. 
Then set the DSP back to OFF.  Then move to the IF and scroll through 
the settings in an effort to find optimum results.  Once this is done, 
leave the IF value as determined and return to the DSP and set it to the 
value previously determined.


This works for a given band and given type of noise.  Change bands or 
noise and do it all again.  There is no ONE setting correct for every 
condition.   Right now my 6M noise buzz is S-7 with the NB off.  Then 
turning it ON and adjusted as above the 6M noise is S-3.  That's 4 S 
units or 24 dB improvement.  I doubt you will get much better than this.


As to Noise Reduction, I find it best performs for CW mode. Again it 
takes careful adjustment to obtain optimum results.   I don't use NR for 
SSB signals. I prefer to adjust the Attenuation value and the RF Gain to 
produce optimum results when operating SSB.   I find optimum results 
occur when the no signal band noise is about 10 dB above the receiver 
noise floor.   In order to accomplish this operating point, one will 
need to use ATTENUATION and RF Gain reduction.   More gain won't aid in 
receiving weak signals, but just the opposite, as the signal will pop 
out of the noise.


I generally find using either NB or NR, but not both, is the better way 
to operate.  I doubt there is anything wrong with your radio.  Most 
likely the result is more related to receiver setting parameters.


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[G4GNX]

I have a similar issue with what is possibly the filthiest wall-wart in the 
country. Unfortunately, our equivalent of the FCC failed miserably to do 
anything to get it stopped, despite my offer to simply buy a new one and the 
dear lady who owns it wouldn’t let anyone in to check.

I am now using a directional LZ1AQ mag-loop setup, with one of the MFJ NR boxes 
and a BHI audio DSP and signals are bearable but not great.

When things are really bad, I resort to cheating and listen on one or other SDR 
via the Internet, where antennas are good and local noise is minimum. What 
surprises me is how good the NR is on them, particularly Hack Green. There may 
not be nearly as much noise as I hear on the K3S, but there must always be some 
and with very little ‘fiddling’ it will sound like a quality FM broadcast (as 
long as the audio itself is clean.

73,
Alan - G4GNX



> On 15 Dec 2021, at 14:55, Dave  wrote:
> 
> I have that same issue...
> I have some very dirty grow lights about two blocks from me.  They are dirty 
> as they come...  Splattering across 80-20 meters.  The K3 has never been able 
> to adequately clean up the crud from them.
> 
> In defense of the NB/NR on the K3, the signals are on the order of S7 to S9, 
> so my expectations may be too high for the K3.  I just hope the K4 NB/NR work 
> better in my environment.
> 
> 73, and thanks,
> Dave (NK7Z)
> https://www.nk7z.net
> ARRL Volunteer Examiner
> ARRL Technical Specialist, RFI
> ARRL Asst. Director, NW Division, Technical Resources
> 

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Bob McGraw]

The approach I use for the Noise Blanker is this.

I first activate the NB and then the Level.   I start with the DSP OFF 
and the IF OFF.  I then adjust the DSP value for optimum results without 
it destroying the quality of the signal.  DO MAKE A NOTE OF THIS VALUE.  
Then set the DSP back to OFF.  Then move to the IF and scroll through 
the settings in an effort to find optimum results.  Once this is done, 
leave the IF value as determined and return to the DSP and set it to the 
value previously determined.


This works for a given band and given type of noise.  Change bands or 
noise and do it all again.  There is no ONE setting correct for every 
condition.   Right now my 6M noise buzz is S-7 with the NB off.  Then 
turning it ON and adjusted as above the 6M noise is S-3.  That's 4 S 
units or 24 dB improvement.  I doubt you will get much better than this.


As to Noise Reduction, I find it best performs for CW mode. Again it 
takes careful adjustment to obtain optimum results.   I don't use NR for 
SSB signals. I prefer to adjust the Attenuation value and the RF Gain to 
produce optimum results when operating SSB.   I find optimum results 
occur when the no signal band noise is about 10 dB above the receiver 
noise floor.   In order to accomplish this operating point, one will 
need to use ATTENUATION and RF Gain reduction.   More gain won't aid in 
receiving weak signals, but just the opposite, as the signal will pop 
out of the noise.


I generally find using either NB or NR, but not both, is the better way 
to operate.  I doubt there is anything wrong with your radio.  Most 
likely the result is more related to receiver setting parameters.


73

Bob, K4TAX


On 12/15/2021 9:46 AM, elecraft-requ...@mailman.qth.net wrote:

Message: 15
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:36:26 -0500
From: Pete Smith N4ZR
To: Elecraft List
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud
line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south.? I
tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and was
unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.? With the noise
blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only was the
buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on the band
were being hum-modulated.? As soon as I turned off the noise blanker,
the CW signals cleaned up.? Is there something wrong with my radio, or
an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too strong??
Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not there all the
time, so that could be tough.

-- 73, Pete N4ZR Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network web server 
at <http://beta.reversebeacon.net>. For spots, please use your 
favorite "retail" DX cluster. -- Message: 
16 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 06:55:25 -0800 From: Dave  
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise 
Reduction Message-ID:  
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed I have that 
same issue... I have some very dirty grow lights about two blocks from 
me. They are dirty as they come... Splattering across 80-20 meters. 
The K3 has never been able to adequately clean up the crud from them. 
In defense of the NB/NR on the K3, the signals are on the order of S7 
to S9, so my expectations may be too high for the K3. I just hope the 
K4 NB/NR work better in my environment. 73, and thanks, Dave (NK7Z) 
https://www.nk7z.net ARRL Volunteer Examiner ARRL Technical 
Specialist, RFI ARRL Asst. Director, NW Division, Technical Resources 
--

Message: 17
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 08:05:59 -0700
From: David Hachadorian
To: Pete Smith N4ZR, Reflector Elecraft
    
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

For 12 years I've tried to get any enhancement of s/n from the K3 IF/RF
NB and NR.? I haven't seen one case where there is any improvement under
contest conditions.? When the s/n just starts to improve, the desired
signal is modulated and degraded by nearby signals to the point where
reception is better with NB/NR turned off.? As far as I can see, both of
these features are useless on the K3 under contest conditions.

Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
Yuma, AZ





__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Ray]

I am Not a big fan of the K3 Noise reduction !
NB work OK, but NR is Poor!

That’s My 2 Cents worth.  Ray WA6VAB


From: Alan Higbie
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2021 7:46 AM
To: David Hachadorian
Cc: Reflector Elecraft
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

I too was skeptical about finding ANY improvement to s/n ratio under
contest conditions.

A couple of years ago, I was confronted with some S-7 broadband
digital-like RFI while using my K3 in an extremely urban environment.  But,
using BOTH NB and NR and fiddling with settings eventually allowed me to
operate and to make a whole bunch of contest QSO’s in CQWW CW.

It is possible - but still unpleasant.

73, Alan K0AV





On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 8:15 AM David Hachadorian 
wrote:

> For 12 years I've tried to get any enhancement of s/n from the K3 IF/RF
> NB and NR.  I haven't seen one case where there is any improvement under
> contest conditions.  When the s/n just starts to improve, the desired
> signal is modulated and degraded by nearby signals to the point where
> reception is better with NB/NR turned off.  As far as I can see, both of
> these features are useless on the K3 under contest conditions.
>
> Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
> Yuma, AZ
>
>
> On 12/15/2021 7:36 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
> > Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud
> > line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south. I
> > tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and
> > was unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.  With the
> > noise blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only
> > was the buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on
> > the band were being hum-modulated.  As soon as I turned off the noise
> > blanker, the CW signals cleaned up.  Is there something wrong with my
> > radio, or an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too
> > strong?  Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not
> > there all the time, so that could be tough.
> >
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to alan.hig...@gmail.com
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to wa6...@gmail.com 

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Victor Rosenthal 4X6GP]

The problem of all signals distorted can be cleared up by adjustment. I 
don't know which blanker you are using (RF or DSP), but try reducing the 
blanker level until signals sound normal. Then strong noise pulses will 
still be supressed.
The RF blanker also has three choices of pulse width in addition to 
various levels, which can help with different types of noise. The DSP 
blanker can cause distortion when its level is adjusted to the higher 
levels.
The NR will not help with this kind of noise. It just reduces band noise 
in the background.


73,
Victor, 4X6GP
Rehovot, Israel
CWops #5
Formerly K2VCO
https://www.qsl.net/k2vco/
On 15/12/2021 16:36, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud 
line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south.  I 
tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and was 
unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.  With the noise 
blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only was the 
buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on the band 
were being hum-modulated.  As soon as I turned off the noise blanker, 
the CW signals cleaned up.  Is there something wrong with my radio, or 
an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too strong? 
Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not there all the 
time, so that could be tough.



__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Alan Higbie]

I too was skeptical about finding ANY improvement to s/n ratio under
contest conditions.

A couple of years ago, I was confronted with some S-7 broadband
digital-like RFI while using my K3 in an extremely urban environment.  But,
using BOTH NB and NR and fiddling with settings eventually allowed me to
operate and to make a whole bunch of contest QSO’s in CQWW CW.

It is possible - but still unpleasant.

73, Alan K0AV





On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 8:15 AM David Hachadorian 
wrote:

> For 12 years I've tried to get any enhancement of s/n from the K3 IF/RF
> NB and NR.  I haven't seen one case where there is any improvement under
> contest conditions.  When the s/n just starts to improve, the desired
> signal is modulated and degraded by nearby signals to the point where
> reception is better with NB/NR turned off.  As far as I can see, both of
> these features are useless on the K3 under contest conditions.
>
> Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
> Yuma, AZ
>
>
> On 12/15/2021 7:36 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
> > Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud
> > line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south. I
> > tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and
> > was unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.  With the
> > noise blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only
> > was the buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on
> > the band were being hum-modulated.  As soon as I turned off the noise
> > blanker, the CW signals cleaned up.  Is there something wrong with my
> > radio, or an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too
> > strong?  Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not
> > there all the time, so that could be tough.
> >
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to alan.hig...@gmail.com
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Carl Yaffey]

I had the same issue with my K3s. Now that I have an FTdx101D, no more problems 
with noise.
73
Carl Yaffey  K8NU
614 268 6353, Columbus OH
http://www.carl-yaffey.com
http://www.bluesswing.com
http://www.timbrewolvesband.com
http://www.folkramblers.carl-yaffey.com
Http://www.clintonvillegrass.com

> On Dec 15, 2021, at 9:36 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR  wrote:
> 
> Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud 
> line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south.  I tried 
> both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and was unable to 
> find any setting that gave useful relief.  With the noise blanker, in 
> particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only was the buzz still very 
> strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on the band were being 
> hum-modulated.  As soon as I turned off the noise blanker, the CW signals 
> cleaned up.  Is there something wrong with my radio, or an adjustment issue, 
> or is this interference simply too strong?  Obviously, I'll be trying to 
> track it down, but it's not there all the time, so that could be tough.
> 
> -- 
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network
> web server at .
> For spots, please use your favorite
> "retail" DX cluster.
> 
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to cyaf...@gmail.com

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[David Hachadorian]

For 12 years I've tried to get any enhancement of s/n from the K3 IF/RF 
NB and NR.  I haven't seen one case where there is any improvement under 
contest conditions.  When the s/n just starts to improve, the desired 
signal is modulated and degraded by nearby signals to the point where 
reception is better with NB/NR turned off.  As far as I can see, both of 
these features are useless on the K3 under contest conditions.


Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
Yuma, AZ


On 12/15/2021 7:36 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud 
line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south. I 
tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and 
was unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.  With the 
noise blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only 
was the buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on 
the band were being hum-modulated.  As soon as I turned off the noise 
blanker, the CW signals cleaned up.  Is there something wrong with my 
radio, or an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too 
strong?  Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not 
there all the time, so that could be tough.



__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Dave]

I have that same issue...
I have some very dirty grow lights about two blocks from me.  They are 
dirty as they come...  Splattering across 80-20 meters.  The K3 has 
never been able to adequately clean up the crud from them.


In defense of the NB/NR on the K3, the signals are on the order of S7 to 
S9, so my expectations may be too high for the K3.  I just hope the K4 
NB/NR work better in my environment.


73, and thanks,
Dave (NK7Z)
https://www.nk7z.net
ARRL Volunteer Examiner
ARRL Technical Specialist, RFI
ARRL Asst. Director, NW Division, Technical Resources

On 12/15/21 06:36, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud 
line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south.  I 
tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and was 
unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.  With the noise 
blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only was the 
buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on the band 
were being hum-modulated.  As soon as I turned off the noise blanker, 
the CW signals cleaned up.  Is there something wrong with my radio, or 
an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too strong? 
Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not there all the 
time, so that could be tough.



__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Pete Smith N4ZR]

Last weekend during the 10 meter contest I was experiencing very loud 
line-noise-like interference when my antenna was pointing south.  I 
tried both my K3's Noise Reduction and Noise Blanker functions, and was 
unable to find any setting that gave useful relief.  With the noise 
blanker, in particular, I noticed that when it was on, not only was the 
buzz still very strong, but it seemed as if all CW signals on the band 
were being hum-modulated.  As soon as I turned off the noise blanker, 
the CW signals cleaned up.  Is there something wrong with my radio, or 
an adjustment issue, or is this interference simply too strong?  
Obviously, I'll be trying to track it down, but it's not there all the 
time, so that could be tough.


--
73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network
web server at .
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com 

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise reduction question

[Sam Morgan]

On 8/31/2014 3:57 PM, Gene wrote:> When holding in the NR button to 
adjust noise reduction, I get

> F1-1,2,3,4 then F2-1,2,3,4 etc for F3 and F4. Going further this is
> repeated for NRmF5, F6, F7 and F8.
>
> Can someone direct me to where in the K3 manual it explains what these
> settings mean and/or when to use NR or NRm?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Gene, W2BXR

K3 Owners Man D10.pdf
pg 6
pg 15

pg 25

Noise Reduction
Noise reduction reduces random background noise
while preserving meaningful signals. It adds a
characteristic “hollow” sound to all signals.
NR turns noise reduction on. It doesn’t apply to
DATA or FM modes, or with AGC turned off.
Hold ADJ to display the NR setting, which is
saved per-mode. Use the VFO B knob to tailor NR
for the present band conditions. In general, the
higher the number, the more aggressive the noise
reduction. Settings F1-1 through F4-4 are
recommended. F5-1 through F8-4 use a different
algorithm, where the -x part of the setting indicates
the degree of mix between the DSP-processed and
unprocessed signals (-1 is about 50% processed, -4
is 100%). A small M appears to remind you that a
Mixed setting is in effect, e.g. NRM F5-1.


also from: http://www.elecraft.com/K3/K3FAQ.htm


How does the Noise Reduction work?

NR depends on correlation of the present input with previous input. The 
system does not actually provide Noise Reduction; it provides Signal 
Selection. In other words, its default is to pass nothing at all. It has 
to believe there is a signal present, and then it builds a filter, or 
set of filters, around the spectral components of the signal it thinks 
is there.
Random noise has no correlation, voice has moderate but not perfect 
(unless you whistle a pure tone) and CW has excellent correlation.  As a 
result, noise is heavily suppressed (no filter is built to pass it), 
voice is partially suppressed (hence it needs some additional gain to 
compensate for this effect so the same AF level will produce about the 
same audio level with a moderate S/N speech signal) and CW is hardly 
suppressed at all (hence it does not need any gain boost).
NR is not recommended in Data Mode.  Data is already getting a matched 
filter in the demodulator. You might lose a few symbols as the NR 
settles around the signal, and it might suppress a very weak signal that 
you could otherwise copy.

NR in the end is intended for modes you listen to.


lastly I saved this gem of a post from Jack WA9FVP


Re: [Elecraft] [K3]Noise Filter (NF) ADJ
wa9fvp Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:19:36 -0800

There's no documentation but as far as I can tell--

F1-x through F4-x defines the amount of noise reduction or how aggressive
the filter attacks the I.F. noise.  F5-X through F8-X defines the amount of
reduction and the level that's mixed with the filtered and non-filtered I.F.
Note that "m" which means "mix" will appear after F5-X and above.

X defines the delay.  Delay is the amount of time it takes for the filter to
converge on a non-sinusoidal signal or the noise.   The higher the number,
the longer it takes for the noise to reduce to a low level.

I hope this helps.

Jack WA9FVP

F1-x through F4-x are for CW
F5-x through F8-x are for SSB


--
GB & 73
K5OAI
Sam Morgan
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise reduction question

[Bob]

You'll find it on page 25.

Bob NW8L

On Sun, 31 Aug 2014, Gene wrote:


Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:57:11 -0400
From: Gene 
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise reduction question

When holding in the NR button to adjust noise reduction, I get F1-1,2,3,4 
then F2-1,2,3,4 etc for F3 and F4. Going further this is repeated for NRmF5, 
F6, F7 and F8.


Can someone direct me to where in the K3 manual it explains what these 
settings mean and/or when to use NR or NRm?


Thanks.

Gene, W2BXR
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to n...@sdf.org



n...@sdf.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.org
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

[Elecraft] K3 Noise reduction question

[Gene]

When holding in the NR button to adjust noise reduction, I get 
F1-1,2,3,4 then F2-1,2,3,4 etc for F3 and F4. Going further this is 
repeated for NRmF5, F6, F7 and F8.


Can someone direct me to where in the K3 manual it explains what these 
settings mean and/or when to use NR or NRm?


Thanks.

Gene, W2BXR
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Laurent F6DEX]

On 7/4/2014 10:13 PM, Johnny Siu wrote:

> I find the noise reduction NR in KX3 is much easier to use and gives a
> better effect than NR in K3 

KX3'NR is simple to use and gives immediatly good results. K3's NR is more
difficult to use but, with low settings like 1-1 or 5-1/5-2/5-3, I find it
excellent and it compares favourably (equivalent) with the KX3 and other
brands or rigs using mid-range settings. The more agressive settings are
very special to use...  

I tested a lot of NR with various brands. Overall, none is better than the
others but for some particular situation, one brand may give better results.
This may explain this particular result with the static noises.

Laurent F6DEX



-
Laurent F6DEX
--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-noise-reduction-query-tp7590854p7590919.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Jim Brown]

On 7/4/2014 10:13 PM, Johnny Siu wrote:

I find the noise reduction NR in KX3 is much easier to use and gives a better 
effect than NR in K3


This may be the result of the DSP used in the KX3, which was designed 
several years after the K3. Moore's Law, and so on.


My neighbor, W6GJB, feels that the KX3 decoders for RTTY and PSK work 
better than the K3 decoders. I don't have enough experience to offer a 
judgement call.


73, Jim K9YC
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Eric Swartz WA6HHQ - Elecraft]

Joe - Please stop posting personal criticisms of other list posters. This is 
both rude and against list policy. The Op in this case was asking a reasonable 
opinion.

Eric
List Moderator
elecraft.com
_..._



> On Jul 4, 2014, at 11:18 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV"  wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2014-07-04 4:23 PM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:
> > Assumes facts not in evidence and is uncalled for.
> 
> Not true - first the question was asked and answered if nothing
> else by the lack of responses.  Second - the question was asking
> for information to make the noise reduction do something that it
> is not designed to do (reduce impulse noise) and comparing it to
> a different product in an unfavorable light.
> 
> Asking a loaded question - one that has been answered previously -
> in a manner to provoke a negative response is the very essence of
> trolling.
> 
> 73,
> 
>   ... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
>> On 2014-07-04 4:23 PM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:
>> Assumes facts not in evidence and is uncalled for.
>> 
>>> On 7/4/2014 6:36 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>> 
>>> > The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
>>> > job of cleaning up this noise.
>>> 
>>> You are trolling for complaints on the Elecraft noise reduction - not
>>> looking for a "solution".
>> 
>> __
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> 
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to li...@subich.com
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to elist_c...@elecraft.com
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

[Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Johnny Siu]

I find the noise reduction NR in KX3 is much easier to use and gives a better 
effect than NR in K3.  I just wonder whether other elecrafters feel the same.

Regrettably, none of the 4 x 8 =32 settings in the NR of K3 gives the 
performance in par with the NR in KX3.

My observations only relate to SSB operation.  I always try to find a way to 
effectively use the NR in K3 but failed.

Perhaps, experts here could guide me to the right way to use the NR in K3.

73

Johnny  VR2XMC
 


 寄件人︰ Lyle Johnson 
收件人︰ elecraft@mailman.qth.net 
傳送日期︰ 2014年07月5日 (週六) 12:47 PM
主題︰ Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query
  

There is an incredible range of characteristics to unwanted "signals" 
that we loosely call noise.

The K3 has an array of tools to fight noise, and sometimes they work 
well in concert and sometimes better alone.

There is an IF blanker with adjustable threshold and pulse width - but 
some impulse noise ay wider than the widest available setting and this 
is likely to include lightning-based pulses.

There is also a DSP-based "IF" noise blanker.

There is a noise reduction, or denoiser function available with a wide 
range of settings.

AGC settings can also affect the operation, and apparent effectiveness, 
of the DSP-based noise reduction and to some degree the noise blanker.  
There is a pulse function in the AGC system that you can enable or disable,

These settings may all interact to some degree.

As the station operator, you have a complete communications system to 
manage: antenna, feedline, QTH, desired path, time of day and so forth.  
The radio is one component of the system.  The K3 offers a range of 
tools for you to use, but in the end there is unlikely to be a "magic" 
setting that works for everything. If there were, we would have set that 
at the factory for you (and probably removed the settable "knobs" for 
you to adjust)!

I suggest that if you are having a severe noise problem, you experiment 
with the various settings - including AGC threshold and slope and PRE 
and ATT settings as part of the tool set - and note which work best for 
you in your system and under which types of noise and mode(s) of operation.

You won't hurt anything, and you may learn a lot.

And, yes, some radios may work better than others with some types of 
noise under some circumstances.

73,

Lyle KK7P (still learning after all of these years...)

> NO MAGIC BULLET.
>
>> I am hoping someone out there has come up with a magic bullet setting 
>> (or even a workable setting) that can be shared. This has been a 
>> summer with loads of lightning static.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net/
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to vr2...@yahoo.com.hk
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Lyle Johnson]

There is an incredible range of characteristics to unwanted "signals" 
that we loosely call noise.


The K3 has an array of tools to fight noise, and sometimes they work 
well in concert and sometimes better alone.


There is an IF blanker with adjustable threshold and pulse width - but 
some impulse noise ay wider than the widest available setting and this 
is likely to include lightning-based pulses.


There is also a DSP-based "IF" noise blanker.

There is a noise reduction, or denoiser function available with a wide 
range of settings.


AGC settings can also affect the operation, and apparent effectiveness, 
of the DSP-based noise reduction and to some degree the noise blanker.  
There is a pulse function in the AGC system that you can enable or disable,


These settings may all interact to some degree.

As the station operator, you have a complete communications system to 
manage: antenna, feedline, QTH, desired path, time of day and so forth.  
The radio is one component of the system.  The K3 offers a range of 
tools for you to use, but in the end there is unlikely to be a "magic" 
setting that works for everything. If there were, we would have set that 
at the factory for you (and probably removed the settable "knobs" for 
you to adjust)!


I suggest that if you are having a severe noise problem, you experiment 
with the various settings - including AGC threshold and slope and PRE 
and ATT settings as part of the tool set - and note which work best for 
you in your system and under which types of noise and mode(s) of operation.


You won't hurt anything, and you may learn a lot.

And, yes, some radios may work better than others with some types of 
noise under some circumstances.


73,

Lyle KK7P (still learning after all of these years...)


NO MAGIC BULLET.

I am hoping someone out there has come up with a magic bullet setting 
(or even a workable setting) that can be shared. This has been a 
summer with loads of lightning static.

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT]

Gentlemen, can we please play nice?

On 7/4/2014 3:18 PM, Bill W2BLC wrote:
The question was not loaded and was not asked in a manner to provoke 
anything - other than perhaps a helpful suggestion or two. Your 
response(s) were uncalled for and are exactly what keeps me, and I am 
sure others, from asking much of anything on this reflector. Your 
response(s) were made in a spiteful and unhelpful manner - designed to 
belittle me for asking the question I had.

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 -- Noise reduction query

[Jeff Cathrow]

OK; thanks for that; I stand corrected---to a large degree---turns out that 
their meanings actually overlap depending on the context in which each word is 
used (although I was brought up by a newspaper editor dad who explained things 
like this to me at an early age).
 
While foundering at sea means filling with water and sinking floundering can 
mean almost the same thing; to flail about helplessly or be lost in a manner of 
speaking---as you so rightly point out.  Down here on the Gulf Coast I happen 
to enjoy eating a lot of grilled flounder, too---but sometimes I have to eat 
crow as it were...
 
I suspect because the words are so often confused that their meanings have 
shifted together over the years an thank you for correcting me (and my 
apologies to the OP for my error/minor rant).  QRT on the OT subject, too



73,
 
Jeff, NH7RO
 
 
 
 
 

cathrowinternatio...@hotmail.com
 
 

 
 
From: k2av@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 19:05:14 -0400
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 -- Noise reduction query
To: cathrowinternatio...@hotmail.com

>From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/floundering?s=t


floun·der1  [floun-der]  Show IPA

verb (used without object)

1.

to struggle with stumbling or plunging movements (usually followed by about, 
along, on, through, etc.): He saw the child floundering about in the water.

2.

to struggle clumsily or helplessly: He floundered helplessly on the first day 
of his new job.

Origin: 


1570–80;  perhaps blend of flounce1  and founder2






On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Jeff Cathrow  
wrote:


And one more thing;



floundering= fishing for flounder



foundering=adrift, as in the Great Sea of Elecraft Features



My minor pet peeve set straight so I will go QRT without further ado...



73,



Jeff, NH7RO





 Happy K-Line-r















__

Elecraft mailing list

Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm

Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net



This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net

Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Message delivered to k2av@gmail.com


  
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Hank P]

If you are talking about SSB on 80 and 40 - I was playing with trying to 
copy

the K2M on 40 M SSB last nite thru all the qrn - something to play with
is the SSB bandwidth and shifting the band- it makes a lot of difference
depending on how the guy has his audio tailored or how his voice is.

You also have a lot of AGC handles to play with - last night reducing
slope and playing with threshold made  significant differences at times.

I don't think there is any magic bullet  - conditions change and what works
one time or at one location  will be different another time.  What works for
one person . one location is very unlikely to be the solution at another
place.

I used TenTec Orions  for about 10 years - they had an incredible NB for
clean line noise spikes  BUT BUT if there were any strong signals anywhere
near (25 -50 khz or more) where you were listening  , the blanker
was useless -but absolutely  great on a quiet band.

I have never found a K3 line noise NB setting as good as the ORION  BUT BUT
I can get decent blanking in crowded band conditions -- I will take that any 
day over
unusable incredible . Years ago Collins used to drive their blanker with a 
separate

noise RX at about 40 mhz - often wished the Orion did that .

NR is a whole different story - I have already been thru  ten years of NR 
discussions,
in my case for me NR F1-1  is as good as anything I have used on either CW 
or SSB
but that is for me - a top flight contester friend across town with Orion 
and K3
to A/B and who lives in a 10 dB quieter location has entirely different 
opinions.

What works for him is entirely different for me.

NO MAGIC BULLET.

My two cents worth .

73 Hank K7HP



I am hoping someone out there has come up with a magic bullet setting (or 
even a workable setting) that can be shared. This has been a summer with 
loads of lightning static.



__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Bill W2BLC]

The question was not loaded and was not asked in a manner to provoke 
anything - other than perhaps a helpful suggestion or two. Your 
response(s) were uncalled for and are exactly what keeps me, and I am 
sure others, from asking much of anything on this reflector. Your 
response(s) were made in a spiteful and unhelpful manner - designed to 
belittle me for asking the question I had.


The helpful spirit of this reflector was not shown today by you and my 
experience was certainly lessened by your responses.


To those taking the time to send useful information, I thank you very 
much. Same was appreciated will be read, understood, and tried. 
Unfortunately, this experience has soured me enough that I see no 
further reason to read this reflector - yeah, my sour grapes!


Bill W2BLC K-Line



__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

On 2014-07-04 4:23 PM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:
> Assumes facts not in evidence and is uncalled for.

Not true - first the question was asked and answered if nothing
else by the lack of responses.  Second - the question was asking
for information to make the noise reduction do something that it
is not designed to do (reduce impulse noise) and comparing it to
a different product in an unfavorable light.

Asking a loaded question - one that has been answered previously -
in a manner to provoke a negative response is the very essence of
trolling.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 2014-07-04 4:23 PM, Wes (N7WS) wrote:

Assumes facts not in evidence and is uncalled for.

On 7/4/2014 6:36 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:


> The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
> job of cleaning up this noise.

You are trolling for complaints on the Elecraft noise reduction - not
looking for a "solution".


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to li...@subich.com


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Wes (N7WS)]

While times and technology have changed in the last 37 years, a little paper I 
wrote back then might be of interest.  Sorry there is something missing near the 
end. Publisher's fault, not mine.


http://sadxa.org/n7ws/Noise_Blanker.pdf

Wes  N7WS

  On 7/4/2014 8:43 AM, Don Wilhelm wrote:

Bill,

With the NB, it will often help to *increase* the RF gain or turn on the 
preamp.  The noise impulse must be above a threshold before it will trigger 
the blanking function.  Keep in mind that setting the NB so the blanking pulse 
is wider may result in distorted signals. It does just what the name suggests, 
it puts a blank *hole* in the received signal.


The NB is better for fast rise time impulse noise such as lightning and 
automotive ignition noise.  NR will do nothing to help that type noise.


I do not believe there is any one magic bullet.  What works for one noise may 
not work for the next one.


73,
Don W3FPR



__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Wes (N7WS)]

Assumes facts not in evidence and is uncalled for.

On 7/4/2014 6:36 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:


> The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
> job of cleaning up this noise.

You are trolling for complaints on the Elecraft noise reduction - not
looking for a "solution". 


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 -- Noise reduction query

[Jeff Cathrow]

And one more thing; 
 
floundering= fishing for flounder
 
foundering=adrift, as in the Great Sea of Elecraft Features
 
My minor pet peeve set straight so I will go QRT without further ado...

73,
 
Jeff, NH7RO

 
 Happy K-Line-r
 
 
 
 
 

  
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Don Wilhelm]

Bill,

With the NB, it will often help to *increase* the RF gain or turn on the 
preamp.  The noise impulse must be above a threshold before it will 
trigger the blanking function.  Keep in mind that setting the NB so the 
blanking pulse is wider may result in distorted signals. It does just 
what the name suggests, it puts a blank *hole* in the received signal.


The NB is better for fast rise time impulse noise such as lightning and 
automotive ignition noise.  NR will do nothing to help that type noise.


I do not believe there is any one magic bullet.  What works for one 
noise may not work for the next one.


73,
Don W3FPR

On 7/4/2014 10:39 AM, Bill W2BLC wrote:
Actually - all of the above. I have spent a lot of time playing with 
all the NB and NR settings (there are many combinations) and have 
incorporated the ATT and reduced RF Gain into the mix. My 
understanding is bringing in the RF at a lower level allows the 
various DSP devices to get a running start at cleaning up the noise. 
So far I have had very little success.


I am hoping someone out there has come up with a magic bullet setting 
(or even a workable setting) that can be shared. This has been a 
summer with loads of lightning static.




__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Eduardo González]

Just now i'm suffering a impulsive noise not filtered by IC-7700,
IC-756proIII, IC-781, however K3 is capable filter this noise with a beside
artifacts, audio become distorted because only is filtered with aggressive
adjustments.

Edu
Yv4gmj
On Jul 4, 2014 10:30 AM, "Eduardo González"  wrote:

> Probably K3 NB is not effective filtering your particular noise. Impulsive
> noise is very hard of characterize because are infinite patterns possible.
> I have filtered majority of arching noise but eventually not was possible.
> You are tested NB analog and NB digital and combined both?
> I remember a 11m radio (3-5825A) with a NB more effective than TS-440S,
> with only a particular noise.
> Recently I discovered a static noise effectively filtered by IC-736 but a
> IC-781 wasn't capable
> We must accepts not cheap equipment wasn't capable filter a type of noise
> is frustrating.
>
> Edu yv4gmj
> On Jul 4, 2014 9:51 AM, "John, 9H5G"  wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> I suggest you use your TS-480 rather than the K3 if that's what works for
>> you. Personally, mine has been gathering dust since I got my K3.
>>
>> 73 de John, 9H5G
>>
>> > On Jul 4, 2014, at 3:36 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV" 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > > The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
>> > > job of cleaning up this noise.
>> >
>> > You are trolling for complaints on the Elecraft noise reduction - not
>> > looking for a "solution".  The Elecraft noise reduction is designed for
>> > "smooth" noise - not impulse noise which is a noise blanker function.
>> >
>> > A smooth noise reduction system (LMS)  operates by forming bandpass
>> > filters around what it determines to be "signal" components and passing
>> > just the "signal".  You will have better results with lightning by
>> > working with the noise blanker - probably on a "long" setting - as
>> > it is designed to work with fast rise time signals.
>> >
>> > 73,
>> >
>> >   ... Joe, W4TV
>> >
>> >
>> >> On 2014-07-04 9:17 AM, Bill W2BLC wrote:
>> >> It is lightning season and I have been floundering around the menus on
>> >> the K3's DSP NR system. I have found no setting that really do much of
>> >> clean-up on lightning static. I also have tried using the ATT and RF
>> >> Gain settings also.
>> >>
>> >> The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
>> >> job of cleaning up this noise.
>> >>
>> >> Of course, lightning static is very random and difficult to reduce. My
>> >> use of HF is 40 and 75, so directional antennas are not an option - as
>> >> some suggested.
>> >>
>> >> Please do not answer with direct emails - the group needs to share in
>> >> this knowledge.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Bill W2BLC K-Line
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> __
>> >> Elecraft mailing list
>> >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> >>
>> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> >> Message delivered to li...@subich.com
>> >>
>> > __
>> > Elecraft mailing list
>> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> >
>> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> > Message delivered to kk4...@gmail.com
>> __
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to edujo...@gmail.com
>>
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Eduardo González]

Probably K3 NB is not effective filtering your particular noise. Impulsive
noise is very hard of characterize because are infinite patterns possible.
I have filtered majority of arching noise but eventually not was possible.
You are tested NB analog and NB digital and combined both?
I remember a 11m radio (3-5825A) with a NB more effective than TS-440S,
with only a particular noise.
Recently I discovered a static noise effectively filtered by IC-736 but a
IC-781 wasn't capable
We must accepts not cheap equipment wasn't capable filter a type of noise
is frustrating.

Edu yv4gmj
On Jul 4, 2014 9:51 AM, "John, 9H5G"  wrote:

> Bill,
>
> I suggest you use your TS-480 rather than the K3 if that's what works for
> you. Personally, mine has been gathering dust since I got my K3.
>
> 73 de John, 9H5G
>
> > On Jul 4, 2014, at 3:36 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV"  wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
> > > job of cleaning up this noise.
> >
> > You are trolling for complaints on the Elecraft noise reduction - not
> > looking for a "solution".  The Elecraft noise reduction is designed for
> > "smooth" noise - not impulse noise which is a noise blanker function.
> >
> > A smooth noise reduction system (LMS)  operates by forming bandpass
> > filters around what it determines to be "signal" components and passing
> > just the "signal".  You will have better results with lightning by
> > working with the noise blanker - probably on a "long" setting - as
> > it is designed to work with fast rise time signals.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> >   ... Joe, W4TV
> >
> >
> >> On 2014-07-04 9:17 AM, Bill W2BLC wrote:
> >> It is lightning season and I have been floundering around the menus on
> >> the K3's DSP NR system. I have found no setting that really do much of
> >> clean-up on lightning static. I also have tried using the ATT and RF
> >> Gain settings also.
> >>
> >> The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
> >> job of cleaning up this noise.
> >>
> >> Of course, lightning static is very random and difficult to reduce. My
> >> use of HF is 40 and 75, so directional antennas are not an option - as
> >> some suggested.
> >>
> >> Please do not answer with direct emails - the group needs to share in
> >> this knowledge.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Bill W2BLC K-Line
> >>
> >>
> >> __
> >> Elecraft mailing list
> >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> >>
> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >> Message delivered to li...@subich.com
> >>
> > __
> > Elecraft mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > Message delivered to kk4...@gmail.com
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to edujo...@gmail.com
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Bill W2BLC]

The K3 is far more capable than the 480 and has the entire line running 
from it. I should not have to be content with the 480 - that is why I 
have the K-Line.


That said, I am sure there is a setting out there that will work - I 
have not found it - hence, the reason I ask.


Bill W2BLC K-Line

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Bill W2BLC]

Actually - all of the above. I have spent a lot of time playing with all 
the NB and NR settings (there are many combinations) and have 
incorporated the ATT and reduced RF Gain into the mix. My understanding 
is bringing in the RF at a lower level allows the various DSP devices to 
get a running start at cleaning up the noise. So far I have had very 
little success.


I am hoping someone out there has come up with a magic bullet setting 
(or even a workable setting) that can be shared. This has been a summer 
with loads of lightning static.


Thanks,

Bill W2BLC K-Line


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[John Oppenheimer]

Hi Bill,

Are you using; NR, IF NB, or dsp NB?

John KN5L
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[John, 9H5G]

Bill,

I suggest you use your TS-480 rather than the K3 if that's what works for you. 
Personally, mine has been gathering dust since I got my K3. 

73 de John, 9H5G

> On Jul 4, 2014, at 3:36 PM, "Joe Subich, W4TV"  wrote:
> 
> 
> > The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
> > job of cleaning up this noise.
> 
> You are trolling for complaints on the Elecraft noise reduction - not
> looking for a "solution".  The Elecraft noise reduction is designed for
> "smooth" noise - not impulse noise which is a noise blanker function.
> 
> A smooth noise reduction system (LMS)  operates by forming bandpass
> filters around what it determines to be "signal" components and passing
> just the "signal".  You will have better results with lightning by
> working with the noise blanker - probably on a "long" setting - as
> it is designed to work with fast rise time signals.
> 
> 73,
> 
>   ... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
>> On 2014-07-04 9:17 AM, Bill W2BLC wrote:
>> It is lightning season and I have been floundering around the menus on
>> the K3's DSP NR system. I have found no setting that really do much of
>> clean-up on lightning static. I also have tried using the ATT and RF
>> Gain settings also.
>> 
>> The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
>> job of cleaning up this noise.
>> 
>> Of course, lightning static is very random and difficult to reduce. My
>> use of HF is 40 and 75, so directional antennas are not an option - as
>> some suggested.
>> 
>> Please do not answer with direct emails - the group needs to share in
>> this knowledge.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Bill W2BLC K-Line
>> 
>> 
>> __
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> 
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to li...@subich.com
>> 
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to kk4...@gmail.com
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Bill W2BLC]

I am trolling for nothing other than suggestions and possibly successful 
settings used by other K3 users. The purpose of this reflector is to aid 
owners/users of Elecraft equipment.


If you have a problem with my asking for K3 operating information and 
shared knowledge - TUFF!


Bill W2BLC K-Line
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
> job of cleaning up this noise.

You are trolling for complaints on the Elecraft noise reduction - not
looking for a "solution".  The Elecraft noise reduction is designed for
"smooth" noise - not impulse noise which is a noise blanker function.

A smooth noise reduction system (LMS)  operates by forming bandpass
filters around what it determines to be "signal" components and passing
just the "signal".  You will have better results with lightning by
working with the noise blanker - probably on a "long" setting - as
it is designed to work with fast rise time signals.

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV


On 2014-07-04 9:17 AM, Bill W2BLC wrote:

It is lightning season and I have been floundering around the menus on
the K3's DSP NR system. I have found no setting that really do much of
clean-up on lightning static. I also have tried using the ATT and RF
Gain settings also.

The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better
job of cleaning up this noise.

Of course, lightning static is very random and difficult to reduce. My
use of HF is 40 and 75, so directional antennas are not an option - as
some suggested.

Please do not answer with direct emails - the group needs to share in
this knowledge.

Thanks,

Bill W2BLC K-Line


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to li...@subich.com


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

[Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction query

[Bill W2BLC]

It is lightning season and I have been floundering around the menus on 
the K3's DSP NR system. I have found no setting that really do much of 
clean-up on lightning static. I also have tried using the ATT and RF 
Gain settings also.


The sad part is that My cheap little Kenwood TS480 does a much better 
job of cleaning up this noise.


Of course, lightning static is very random and difficult to reduce. My 
use of HF is 40 and 75, so directional antennas are not an option - as 
some suggested.


Please do not answer with direct emails - the group needs to share in 
this knowledge.


Thanks,

Bill W2BLC K-Line


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction suggestions

[Keith Onishi]

NB is good at taking care of pulse noise such as ignition or static noise. NR 
is good at taking care of continuous noise, but not for pulse noise.
My location is in noise rich environment caused by power line nearby. So, 
nature of the strong noise is continuous noise, which I use NR as well as 
adjusting RF gain and AGC level.
NB/NR setting depends on noise strength and nature of the noise. I often adjust 
NB/NR settings to have better receive performance.

73 de JH3SIF, Keith

2014/07/04 10:14、Bill W2BLC  のメッセージ:
> Got to clear this up quickly - the off-reflector emails are catching up on my 
> mistake of saying NB - I should have said NR-DSP. The latter is very 
> disappointing and that is what I need help. The 480 does a far better job 
> with handling lightning noise.
> 
> PLEASE - do not reply by email. Share the information on the reflector - that 
> is what its for.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bill W2BLC K-Line
> 
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to jh3...@sumaq.jp
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 - noise reduction suggestions

[Bill W2BLC]

Got to clear this up quickly - the off-reflector emails are catching up 
on my mistake of saying NB - I should have said NR-DSP. The latter is 
very disappointing and that is what I need help. The 480 does a far 
better job with handling lightning noise.


PLEASE - do not reply by email. Share the information on the reflector - 
that is what its for.


Thanks,

Bill W2BLC K-Line

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Adjustment via CAT

[Tom]

Hi
Yes it is possible but not if you are not actually programming via rs232. 
You have to issue a SWR command (or Swh I'm working from memory here) Cohen 
read the vfoa display with a Ds command and then issue the appropriate up and 
down commands. Same for vfob. 
If you have no way to read the DS value and do some programming logic you are 
out of luck. 
Hope this helps
73s Tom 




 Original message 
From: Charles Sanders  
Date: 27/05/2014  22:29  (GMT-05:00) 
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net 
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Adjustment via CAT 
 
Is it possible to adjust the K3 noise reduction level via CAT? I could not
find reference to it in the Programmer's Manual.

Any information on when/where that might be available would be appreciated.

73/Chuck/NO5W
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to tom...@videotron.ca
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Adjustment via CAT

[Charles Sanders]

Is it possible to adjust the K3 noise reduction level via CAT? I could not
find reference to it in the Programmer's Manual.

Any information on when/where that might be available would be appreciated.

73/Chuck/NO5W
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise Reduction - FWIW

[Arie Kleingeld PA3A]

Jim,

I know the difference between NB and NR, no worries :-)

Thanks very much for that pointer to the DSP guide. Nice!


73
Arie PA3A

Op 7-11-2012 20:15, W4ATK schreef:
> .
> I sense a number of users may not be entirely familiar with noise reduction 
> as it pertains to a software defined radio. In some cases, it seems one is 
> trying to use noise reduction where one should be using noise blanking, a 
> common mistake in attempting to reduce impulse noise from power lines.
> .
>   One resource I found to be of benefit to me in helping me to understand 
> the "processes" of DSP  is "The Engineer's Guide to Digital Signal 
> Processing" by Steven W. Smith.  It is a free download from 
> http://www.dspguide.com.
>
> 73s, Jim, W4ATK

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise Reduction - FWIW

[KD8NNU]

HI Jim,

Would be so kind as to share your settings that give you a sweet spot and 
what is the nature of the noise that drove you to that setting.

Thanks in advance.

Don

~73
Don
KD8NNU
-Original Message- 
From: W4ATK
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 2:15 PM
To: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: [Elecraft] K3: Noise Reduction - FWIW

I have read with interest the e-mails regarding the K3 noise reduction 
feature.  I will post my observations herewith.  It took a bit of work to 
find the "sweet spot" setting for my noise environment. Once found, it has 
proven to be quite satisfactory. Having worked with a number of SDR type of 
radios (Flex, Yaesu, and now K3 and for that matter K2) I can say that, in 
my opinion, the K3 is as good as it gets. I sense a number of users may not 
be entirely familiar with noise reduction as it pertains to a software 
defined radio. In some cases, it seems one is trying to use noise reduction 
where one should be using noise blanking, a common mistake in attempting to 
reduce impulse noise from power lines. Another common mistake would be to 
solicit the settings from another user in a different noise environment.

One resource I found to be of benefit to me in helping me to understand the 
"processes" of DSP  is "The Engineer's Guide to Digital Signal Processing" 
by Steven W. Smith.  It is a free download from http://www.dspguide.com.

73s, Jim, W4ATK
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise Reduction - FWIW

[Ethan Miller K8GU]

Jim makes some superb points here.

The fundamental question is:  What noise are you trying to eliminate?
Not all noises are created equal, neither are all signals.  In my
business we are also fond of saying "One man's signal is another man's
noise."

This question dictates the design of your (receive) antenna system all
the way to the choice of radio, IF and digital filters, etc.  Not
having read KE7X's book myself (it's on my Christmas list), I cannot
be sure how the NR filters in the K3 are implemented.  However,
appearances are that you select a type of filter and then the
agressiveness of that filter.  This seems to me that is fundamentally
more powerful than the lauded one-knob approach of the FTDX-5000 if
the filter you have selected was designed to eliminate the type of
noise you are experiencing from the kind of signal you are receiving.
I do hope to learn how this is implemented in the K3 and hopefully
exploit it to my advantage in the future.

Another point---I seem to recall coming across something in the K3
User's Manual about the NR filters being optimized for use in a CW
bandwidth (I forget what the exact number was 250-500 Hz or
something).  If that is the case, then no wonder they don't work in
SSB bandwdiths!  This is fundamental signal processing.  It has little
to do with the power the DSP chips or the efficiency of the DSP
algorithms.  Based on my limited knowledge of noise reduction
techniques useful for amateur radio, SSB is a considerably more
challenging problem than CW.  And it is one the JAs must have
apparently mastered.  I suspect that they also choose filters based on
the bandwidth and mode selected in the radio and it's just transparent
to the user.

Like Jim, I have been relatively satisfied with the NR in my K3 so
far, probably because 1. I'm principally a CW operator, 2. I use it
sparingly, 3. I choose to address my noise problems at RF when
possible, and 4. I have no interest in buying a $5000 radio that
doesn't fit in hand luggage.

73,

--Ethan, K8GU/3.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:15 PM, W4ATK  wrote:
> I have read with interest the e-mails regarding the K3 noise 
> reduction feature.  I will post my observations herewith.  It took a bit of 
> work to find the "sweet spot" setting for my noise environment. Once found, 
> it has proven to be quite satisfactory. Having worked with a number of SDR 
> type of radios (Flex, Yaesu, and now K3 and for that matter K2) I can say 
> that, in my opinion, the K3 is as good as it gets. I sense a number of users 
> may not be entirely familiar with noise reduction as it pertains to a 
> software defined radio. In some cases, it seems one is trying to use noise 
> reduction where one should be using noise blanking, a common mistake in 
> attempting to reduce impulse noise from power lines. Another common mistake 
> would be to solicit the settings from another user in a different noise 
> environment.
>
> One resource I found to be of benefit to me in helping me to 
> understand the "processes" of DSP  is "The Engineer's Guide to Digital Signal 
> Processing" by Steven W. Smith.  It is a free download from 
> http://www.dspguide.com.
>
> 73s, Jim, W4ATK
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



-- 
http://www.k8gu.com/
Repair.  Re-use.  Re-purpose.  Recycle.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise Reduction - FWIW

[Fred Smith]

Jim 

Yaesu set a new standard with the 5000 series like nothing prior that they
ever had. As for the Flex IMHO that needs to go to a computer forum as that
is what it is and yes I know all the hype it's the mouse and no KNOBS!

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of W4ATK
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 1:16 PM
To: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: [Elecraft] K3: Noise Reduction - FWIW

I have read with interest the e-mails regarding the K3 noise
reduction feature.  I will post my observations herewith.  It took a bit of
work to find the "sweet spot" setting for my noise environment. Once found,
it has proven to be quite satisfactory. Having worked with a number of SDR
type of radios (Flex, Yaesu, and now K3 and for that matter K2) I can say
that, in my opinion, the K3 is as good as it gets. I sense a number of users
may not be entirely familiar with noise reduction as it pertains to a
software defined radio. In some cases, it seems one is trying to use noise
reduction where one should be using noise blanking, a common mistake in
attempting to reduce impulse noise from power lines. Another common mistake
would be to solicit the settings from another user in a different noise
environment. 

One resource I found to be of benefit to me in helping me to
understand the "processes" of DSP  is "The Engineer's Guide to Digital
Signal Processing" by Steven W. Smith.  It is a free download from
http://www.dspguide.com. 

73s, Jim, W4ATK
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3: Noise Reduction - FWIW

[W4ATK]

I have read with interest the e-mails regarding the K3 noise reduction 
feature.  I will post my observations herewith.  It took a bit of work to find 
the "sweet spot" setting for my noise environment. Once found, it has proven to 
be quite satisfactory. Having worked with a number of SDR type of radios (Flex, 
Yaesu, and now K3 and for that matter K2) I can say that, in my opinion, the K3 
is as good as it gets. I sense a number of users may not be entirely familiar 
with noise reduction as it pertains to a software defined radio. In some cases, 
it seems one is trying to use noise reduction where one should be using noise 
blanking, a common mistake in attempting to reduce impulse noise from power 
lines. Another common mistake would be to solicit the settings from another 
user in a different noise environment. 

One resource I found to be of benefit to me in helping me to understand 
the "processes" of DSP  is "The Engineer's Guide to Digital Signal Processing" 
by Steven W. Smith.  It is a free download from http://www.dspguide.com. 

73s, Jim, W4ATK
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction question

[Guy Olinger K2AV]

Hi Fred,

>From where I sit, if the NR display has a little "m" between NR and F,
those are methods best on voice (F5-1 through F8-4), while without the
little "m" (F1-1 through F4-4) are methods better with CW.  That is not an
absolute rule of course and many people have preferences which don't abide
by those categories.  People differ wildly on their sound perceptions and
preferences. Some people can't stand a hollow sound, like scraping a
chalkboard with fingernails.  Others need clear highs in speech or they
just cannot understand it.

It is not even a tiny bit surprising you find 1-1 "hollow" on SSB.  1-1 is
a method designed to dynamically peak up a frequency, DEFINITELY NOT a band
of frequencies like SSB. If you turn on 160m and listen to the static
crashes using 1-1, you can hear the method try to tune in on a center, and
this will move around just depending on the nature of the static crash. If
that hones in on a low frequency on voice, then I LOSE the all important
highs for sibilant sounds, this does not happen on 6-2 which is one of my
favorites.

Personally, I do NOT agree with the Noise Reduction section in the current
K3 manual on page 25, where they only recommend 1-1 through 4-1. There is
not even one NON-mixed setting that I like on SSB.

Nothing wrong, your K3 is not busted, YOU are not busted.  If you like it,
use it, if you don't like it, don't use it. Try them all on for size.

73, Guy.

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Fred Jensen  wrote:

> I operate mainly CW and while the NB is very effective for me on CW,
> I've never seen much advantage to the NR at narrow CW bandwidths.  I had
> occasion to be on SSB this week attempting to work several SOTA summit
> activations, and tried the NR.  At the wider SSB BW, it made a great
> difference.
>
> With NR however, even at F1-1 [which I think means least aggressive],
> while the nasty line noise really fell, the SSB signal acquired a
> profound echo which made it very hard to understand.  I'm running FW4.39
> and whatever DSP came with it.  Is this reverberation [it's more like
> that than a distinct echo, like talking through a long pipe] normal?
> The further "up" the NR scale I went, the more pronounced it got, and
> beyond F1-4, the signal was indecipherable.
>
> Full Disclosure:  My hearing sucks and has since one night in 1965 on
> the other side of the planet, so me telling you what something sounds
> like can be somewhat of a joke.  I can't use my hearing aids under my
> headphones, so I run the AF gain high ["afterburner roar" or close], but
> the reverb effect definitely is controlled by the NR.
>
> 73,
>
> Fred K6DGW
> - Northern California Contest Club
> - CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
> - www.cqp.org
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction question

[Robert G. Strickland]

I also note the "hollow" sound to SSB when using the K3 NR. If I use it 
at all, it's at the lowest setting, 1-1. I had the same listening 
experience with the K2 DSP NR unit. It worked well on CW - sometimes 
miraculous - but for my ears, useless on SSB. The K3 NB works on all 
modes, every time. I haven't tried the higher K3 NR setting for SSB, 
being primarily a CW op. Also, my hearing is poor. Hearing aids all the 
time except when under the head phones and operating CW.
...robert


On 4/27/2012 20:58, Fred Jensen wrote:
> I operate mainly CW and while the NB is very effective for me on CW,
> I've never seen much advantage to the NR at narrow CW bandwidths.  I had
> occasion to be on SSB this week attempting to work several SOTA summit
> activations, and tried the NR.  At the wider SSB BW, it made a great
> difference.
>
> With NR however, even at F1-1 [which I think means least aggressive],
> while the nasty line noise really fell, the SSB signal acquired a
> profound echo which made it very hard to understand.  I'm running FW4.39
> and whatever DSP came with it.  Is this reverberation [it's more like
> that than a distinct echo, like talking through a long pipe] normal?
> The further "up" the NR scale I went, the more pronounced it got, and
> beyond F1-4, the signal was indecipherable.
>
> Full Disclosure:  My hearing sucks and has since one night in 1965 on
> the other side of the planet, so me telling you what something sounds
> like can be somewhat of a joke.  I can't use my hearing aids under my
> headphones, so I run the AF gain high ["afterburner roar" or close], but
> the reverb effect definitely is controlled by the NR.
>
> 73,
>
> Fred K6DGW
> - Northern California Contest Club
> - CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
> - www.cqp.org
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

-- 
Robert G. Strickland, PhD, ABPH - KE2WY
rc...@verizon.net
Syracuse, New York, USA
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction question

[Arthur Burke]

I have some tinnitus (sp?) so, when things are really, really quiet, I hear
things
that really aren't there! Aside from that, a recent hearing test indicated
my hearing
was normal for my age (67) and I hear equally well (or equally poor!) with
both ears.

My experience with the NR has been somewhat the opposite of yours. I love
to back the
RF gain down just a tad, turn on the NR (don't remember the exact setting
right off the top
of my head) to where I have to strain to hear band noise. Then, when a
signal does appear, it sort of magically jumps out of the speakers!

Art - N4PJ


On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Fred Jensen  wrote:

> I operate mainly CW and while the NB is very effective for me on CW,
> I've never seen much advantage to the NR at narrow CW bandwidths.  I had
> occasion to be on SSB this week attempting to work several SOTA summit
> activations, and tried the NR.  At the wider SSB BW, it made a great
> difference.
>
> With NR however, even at F1-1 [which I think means least aggressive],
> while the nasty line noise really fell, the SSB signal acquired a
> profound echo which made it very hard to understand.  I'm running FW4.39
> and whatever DSP came with it.  Is this reverberation [it's more like
> that than a distinct echo, like talking through a long pipe] normal?
> The further "up" the NR scale I went, the more pronounced it got, and
> beyond F1-4, the signal was indecipherable.
>
> Full Disclosure:  My hearing sucks and has since one night in 1965 on
> the other side of the planet, so me telling you what something sounds
> like can be somewhat of a joke.  I can't use my hearing aids under my
> headphones, so I run the AF gain high ["afterburner roar" or close], but
> the reverb effect definitely is controlled by the NR.
>
> 73,
>
> Fred K6DGW
> - Northern California Contest Club
> - CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
> - www.cqp.org
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction question

[Don Wilhelm]

Fred,

Perhaps an explanation of how NR works will help you understand what you 
are hearing a bit better.  The NR algorithm looks for some sequence that 
it can define as a signal, and then builds a filter around it.  The type 
of filter is determined by the parameters you have set.

That is why you have found there is no need for NR when using CW with 
narrow filters.  On SSB, yes, some settings can sound "pretty ratty".  
Enough so that I do not use it on SSB.  But do give some of the settings 
above 4-4 a try - those use a different algorithm and may be worthwhile 
when needed.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/27/2012 4:58 PM, Fred Jensen wrote:
> I operate mainly CW and while the NB is very effective for me on CW,
> I've never seen much advantage to the NR at narrow CW bandwidths.  I had
> occasion to be on SSB this week attempting to work several SOTA summit
> activations, and tried the NR.  At the wider SSB BW, it made a great
> difference.
>
> With NR however, even at F1-1 [which I think means least aggressive],
> while the nasty line noise really fell, the SSB signal acquired a
> profound echo which made it very hard to understand.  I'm running FW4.39
> and whatever DSP came with it.  Is this reverberation [it's more like
> that than a distinct echo, like talking through a long pipe] normal?
> The further "up" the NR scale I went, the more pronounced it got, and
> beyond F1-4, the signal was indecipherable.
>
> Full Disclosure:  My hearing sucks and has since one night in 1965 on
> the other side of the planet, so me telling you what something sounds
> like can be somewhat of a joke.  I can't use my hearing aids under my
> headphones, so I run the AF gain high ["afterburner roar" or close], but
> the reverb effect definitely is controlled by the NR.
>
> 73,
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction question

[Fred Jensen]

On 4/27/2012 2:32 PM, ab2tc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Have you tried the NB (*not* NR)? I find it very effective against power
> line noise. I use the setting t2-6, IF off. For a long time I was using a
> combination of DSP and IF setting, but found that the IF contribution was
> little or non-existing, so I switched to DSP NB only.

Yeppers, my K3 is S/N 642 [it tells me every time I power up just in 
case I forget :-)] and I have used NB consistently on both CW and SSB. 
IF NB often drops the level 2 S-Units or sometimes 3.  Both IF and DSP 
seem to be quite sensitive to the character of the noise, I run the DSP 
between T1-5 and T2-3 usually, IF is usually on NAR 3 or 4.

On CW, I've never found much benefit from NR, regardless of the 
"aggression setting," which I've always attributed to a 150-250 Hz BW. 
When running in a contest, I'll usually run the BW at 450-500 so I can 
spot off-freq callers and the NR seems to have slightly more effect at 
the wider BW.  Since I got the P3 however, I can *see* the off-freq 
callers however and just go to them with RIT.

I don't think I've ever really tried NR on SSB until this week, when I 
noticed the reverb effect.  NB is equally effective on SSB as on CW, the 
setting is usually a bit different though at the wider BW.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
- www.cqp.org

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction question

[ab2tc]

Hi,

Have you tried the NB (*not* NR)? I find it very effective against power
line noise. I use the setting t2-6, IF off. For a long time I was using a
combination of DSP and IF setting, but found that the IF contribution was
little or non-existing, so I switched to DSP NB only.

AB2TC - Knut


k6dgw wrote
> 
> I operate mainly CW and while the NB is very effective for me on CW, 
> I've never seen much advantage to the NR at narrow CW bandwidths.  I had 
> occasion to be on SSB this week attempting to work several SOTA summit 
> activations, and tried the NR.  At the wider SSB BW, it made a great 
> difference.
> 
> With NR however, even at F1-1 [which I think means least aggressive], 
> while the nasty line noise really fell, the SSB signal acquired a 
> profound echo which made it very hard to understand.  I'm running FW4.39 
> and whatever DSP came with it.  Is this reverberation [it's more like 
> that than a distinct echo, like talking through a long pipe] normal? 
> The further "up" the NR scale I went, the more pronounced it got, and 
> beyond F1-4, the signal was indecipherable.
> 
> Full Disclosure:  My hearing sucks and has since one night in 1965 on 
> the other side of the planet, so me telling you what something sounds 
> like can be somewhat of a joke.  I can't use my hearing aids under my 
> headphones, so I run the AF gain high ["afterburner roar" or close], but 
> the reverb effect definitely is controlled by the NR.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Fred K6DGW
> - Northern California Contest Club
> - CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
> - www.cqp.org
> 
> 
> 


--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-Noise-Reduction-question-tp7507450p7507498.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction question

[ab2tc]

Hi,

Have you tried the NB (*not* NR)? I find it very effective against power
line noise. I use the setting t2-6, IF off. For a long time I was using a
combination of DSP and IF setting, but found that the IF contribution was
little or non-existing, so I switched to DSP NB only.

AB2TC - Knut


k6dgw wrote
> 
> I operate mainly CW and while the NB is very effective for me on CW, 
> I've never seen much advantage to the NR at narrow CW bandwidths.  I had 
> occasion to be on SSB this week attempting to work several SOTA summit 
> activations, and tried the NR.  At the wider SSB BW, it made a great 
> difference.
> 
> With NR however, even at F1-1 [which I think means least aggressive], 
> while the nasty line noise really fell, the SSB signal acquired a 
> profound echo which made it very hard to understand.  I'm running FW4.39 
> and whatever DSP came with it.  Is this reverberation [it's more like 
> that than a distinct echo, like talking through a long pipe] normal? 
> The further "up" the NR scale I went, the more pronounced it got, and 
> beyond F1-4, the signal was indecipherable.
> 
> Full Disclosure:  My hearing sucks and has since one night in 1965 on 
> the other side of the planet, so me telling you what something sounds 
> like can be somewhat of a joke.  I can't use my hearing aids under my 
> headphones, so I run the AF gain high ["afterburner roar" or close], but 
> the reverb effect definitely is controlled by the NR.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Fred K6DGW
> - Northern California Contest Club
> - CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
> - www.cqp.org
> 
> 
> 


--
View this message in context: 
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/K3-Noise-Reduction-question-tp7507450p7507495.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction question

[Fred Jensen]

I operate mainly CW and while the NB is very effective for me on CW, 
I've never seen much advantage to the NR at narrow CW bandwidths.  I had 
occasion to be on SSB this week attempting to work several SOTA summit 
activations, and tried the NR.  At the wider SSB BW, it made a great 
difference.

With NR however, even at F1-1 [which I think means least aggressive], 
while the nasty line noise really fell, the SSB signal acquired a 
profound echo which made it very hard to understand.  I'm running FW4.39 
and whatever DSP came with it.  Is this reverberation [it's more like 
that than a distinct echo, like talking through a long pipe] normal? 
The further "up" the NR scale I went, the more pronounced it got, and 
beyond F1-4, the signal was indecipherable.

Full Disclosure:  My hearing sucks and has since one night in 1965 on 
the other side of the planet, so me telling you what something sounds 
like can be somewhat of a joke.  I can't use my hearing aids under my 
headphones, so I run the AF gain high ["afterburner roar" or close], but 
the reverb effect definitely is controlled by the NR.

73,

Fred K6DGW
- Northern California Contest Club
- CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012
- www.cqp.org

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Roy Morris]

This has been the second big thread about NR.  Firmware improvements were made 
at that time, but additional firmware improvements still need to be made.  I 
don't believe a "how to" primer is going to be the cure-all and make the K3 NR 
work as well as the NR function on the other mentioned transceivers.  The K3 is 
the best transceiver on the market and deserves the best NR on the market.  I 
believe some MOJO dust will be sprinkled in Aptos to make this happen.  Roy  
W4WFB 
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

[goldtr8]

In my opinion the manual is fine, now that I have a few months of 
operation under my belt.  When I just starting out with the rig I was 
struggling a lot.

So what I personally believe is needed is the starter guide and theory 
of operation kind of document.  This would be targeted for a new K3 
owner on how to get going and why defaults are set the way the way they 
are.

With the above in mind after you get some experience with the rig I am 
not sure how much you would refer to it anymore.

Don
KD8NNU


On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 1:20 PM, n...@comcast.net wrote:

> I agree with Alexander .  The manual is fine as is.  A Wiki type 
> online resource with company and user input would be fantastic.  N1MM 
> has recently revamped their online user guide into levels--Getting 
> Started, Digging Deeper and References.
>
> Dave, N4QS
>
> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Sack 
> Sender: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
> Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 12:12:19 To: Wayne Burdick
> Cc: ; Ralph Parker
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction
>
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Wayne Burdick  
> wrote:
>> Don Cunningham wrote:
>>
>>> We were PROMISED an "enhanced" manual around Christmas, 2010...
>>
>> A new operating manual actually was written, by a third party (based
>> on their enthusiastic pitch, we agreed to let them have a crack at
>> it). But when we reviewed it last month, we had very significant
>> differences over style and content. So we're back to the drawing
>> board, looking for possible authors. Our own tech writer would do an
>> excellent job, but he's scheduled out many months on project manuals.
>
> Wayne:
>
> I know this may not be the most popular opinion but the fact is in my
> opinion, you don't need an updated manual.  Trying to develop the
> perfect manual is a complete loss leader with very little return.
> Trying to write a long compendium about an evolving product makes
> absolutely no sense to me!  :-)
>
> What you do need is an Elecraft Wiki where you can leverage the
> strong/knowledgeable/enthusiastic customer base to generate helpful
> content in addition to this list.  A content management system of some
> type (Joomla, Wiki, Knowledge-base, etc.) would not only provide a
> forum in which Elecraft could write more in-depth articles about
> various popular topics but also be self-updating to some extent.
> Users of Elecraft products would help in managing, updating, and
> contributing content on a regular basis.  Obviously this has to be a
> managed site to some extent with Elecraft having the final say about
> certain types of content, but it seems to me a no brain-er that a lot
> of the information disseminated on the this mailing list should be
> aggregated to a central site.
>
> 73
>
> -aps
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

[n4qs]

I agree with Alexander .  The manual is fine as is.  A Wiki type online 
resource with company and user input would be fantastic.  N1MM has recently 
revamped their online user guide into levels--Getting Started, Digging Deeper 
and References.

Dave, N4QS

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-Original Message-
From: Alexander Sack 
Sender: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 12:12:19 
To: Wayne Burdick
Cc: ; Ralph Parker
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Wayne Burdick  wrote:
> Don Cunningham wrote:
>
>> We were PROMISED an "enhanced" manual around Christmas, 2010...
>
> A new operating manual actually was written, by a third party (based
> on their enthusiastic pitch, we agreed to let them have a crack at
> it). But when we reviewed it last month, we had very significant
> differences over style and content. So we're back to the drawing
> board, looking for possible authors. Our own tech writer would do an
> excellent job, but he's scheduled out many months on project manuals.

Wayne:

I know this may not be the most popular opinion but the fact is in my
opinion, you don't need an updated manual.  Trying to develop the
perfect manual is a complete loss leader with very little return.
Trying to write a long compendium about an evolving product makes
absolutely no sense to me!  :-)

What you do need is an Elecraft Wiki where you can leverage the
strong/knowledgeable/enthusiastic customer base to generate helpful
content in addition to this list.  A content management system of some
type (Joomla, Wiki, Knowledge-base, etc.) would not only provide a
forum in which Elecraft could write more in-depth articles about
various popular topics but also be self-updating to some extent.
Users of Elecraft products would help in managing, updating, and
contributing content on a regular basis.  Obviously this has to be a
managed site to some extent with Elecraft having the final say about
certain types of content, but it seems to me a no brain-er that a lot
of the information disseminated on the this mailing list should be
aggregated to a central site.

73

-aps
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

[Don Cunningham]

Wayne,
At least, thank you for your kind, civil response to our plea.  I knew this 
thread would degenerate to "he's a stupid ham that can't run his rig", but 
you didn't go there.  Don't do anything more as it seems only two of us have 
a problem, and that's certainly a minority.  I'll either learn to do what I 
want to do with the K3/P3/W2 or I'll sell them and use the other rigs that 
work for me.  Thanks for the try.
73,
Don, WB5HAK 

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

[Alexander Sack]

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Wayne Burdick  wrote:
> Don Cunningham wrote:
>
>> We were PROMISED an "enhanced" manual around Christmas, 2010...
>
> A new operating manual actually was written, by a third party (based
> on their enthusiastic pitch, we agreed to let them have a crack at
> it). But when we reviewed it last month, we had very significant
> differences over style and content. So we're back to the drawing
> board, looking for possible authors. Our own tech writer would do an
> excellent job, but he's scheduled out many months on project manuals.

Wayne:

I know this may not be the most popular opinion but the fact is in my
opinion, you don't need an updated manual.  Trying to develop the
perfect manual is a complete loss leader with very little return.
Trying to write a long compendium about an evolving product makes
absolutely no sense to me!  :-)

What you do need is an Elecraft Wiki where you can leverage the
strong/knowledgeable/enthusiastic customer base to generate helpful
content in addition to this list.  A content management system of some
type (Joomla, Wiki, Knowledge-base, etc.) would not only provide a
forum in which Elecraft could write more in-depth articles about
various popular topics but also be self-updating to some extent.
Users of Elecraft products would help in managing, updating, and
contributing content on a regular basis.  Obviously this has to be a
managed site to some extent with Elecraft having the final say about
certain types of content, but it seems to me a no brain-er that a lot
of the information disseminated on the this mailing list should be
aggregated to a central site.

73

-aps
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

[Gary Gregory]

Wayne

Sounds like a job I DON'T want to volunteer for..:-)

73's
Gary

On 17 May 2011 13:35, Wayne Burdick  wrote:

> Don Cunningham wrote:
>
> > We were PROMISED an "enhanced" manual around Christmas, 2010...
>
> A new operating manual actually was written, by a third party (based
> on their enthusiastic pitch, we agreed to let them have a crack at
> it). But when we reviewed it last month, we had very significant
> differences over style and content. So we're back to the drawing
> board, looking for possible authors. Our own tech writer would do an
> excellent job, but he's scheduled out many months on project manuals.
>
> 73,
> Wayne
> N6KR
>
>
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>



-- 

VK4FD - Motorhome Mobile
Elecraft Equipment
K3 #679, KPA-500 #018
Living the dream!!!
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

[Wayne Burdick]

Don Cunningham wrote:

> We were PROMISED an "enhanced" manual around Christmas, 2010...

A new operating manual actually was written, by a third party (based  
on their enthusiastic pitch, we agreed to let them have a crack at  
it). But when we reviewed it last month, we had very significant  
differences over style and content. So we're back to the drawing  
board, looking for possible authors. Our own tech writer would do an  
excellent job, but he's scheduled out many months on project manuals.

73,
Wayne
N6KR



__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

[Don Cunningham]

Ralph,
We were PROMISED an "enhanced" manual around Christmas, 2010, but I guess 
it's time to give up on it being done.  I'm with you, I'd sure like to see 
something..
73,
Don, WB5HAK 

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction

[Ralph Parker]

>The NR pays some attention to the settings of AGC Slope and AGC Threshold...

That's why I need a primer to help me figure out the differences in settings.
And the NB, too.

>In the end, NR is a filter, and like any filter it will affect what is
>being passed through it.  The weaker the signal, the more it appears
>like noise and the harder it is to separate the two...

Just like the APF - try as I might, I can hear weak signals better without it.
I'm unable to separate the signal from the ringing (in spite of the help
and hints I've received here).

Ralph, VE7XF

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Roy Morris]

I find the K3 noise reduction to be acceptable.  My K3s are the best radios I 
have owned, but I think the noise reduction algorythms could be made better.  
The best NR in my opinion is found in the Ten-Tec Omni VII.  There is very 
little SSB "coloring" in the Omni VII while background noise is drastically 
reduced producing a very quiet receiver under high QRN conditions.  I would 
still have my Omni VII if it did not lock up (ESD).  I hope the K3 NR firmware 
can be revisited and improved in the future making the best transceiver even 
better.  Roy  W4WFB
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction

[Bob]

I love the K3, it has so many outstanding features and flexibility, nothing
compares and I can't imagine owning a better rig, HOWEVER, and this is a big
however, the NR in my opinion sucks! I have had correspondence with the
helpful people at Elecraft, but I still find myself looking at external
third party NR units such as those offered by bhi. Then I stop myself and
say "wait, this is an Elecraft K3?", I should not have to want for an
external NR system, the K3 should be able to do what I need. However, I have
tried and and tried and no matter what the situation, invariably I am better
off (to my ears) trying to copy a signal with the NR in the off position. I
am hopeful that one of the upcoming firmware releases will solve this issue
for me. None the less, I still think the at the K3 is second to none! Just
my two cents.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[Gary Gregory]

James,

I concur. There is a noticeable drop in 'audio level' when I activate NR and
it does not depend on the settings from what I can tell.

I would hope this does creep up the list quite a bit as I feel it has been
left as a dormant issue long enough.

Gary

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 2:13 AM, James Sarte (K2QI) wrote:

> Hi Lyle!
>
> Indeed, this is a very subjective issue. One issue though that many will
> probably agree with me on is the decrease in audio fidelity whenever NR is
> engaged; i.e. volume of speech drops in relation to NR.  Would it be
> possible to alter the algorithm to prevent this from happening?
>
> It seems to me like the current NR algorithm reduces *everything* within
> the
> passband, including spoken word.
>
> 73,
> James K2QI
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Lyle Johnson  wrote:
>
> > Psycho-acoustics is fun!  Some people swear by the K3 NR, others swear
> > at it :-)
> >
> > Making further changes to the K3 NR remains a possibility, but is not a
> > particularly high priority at the moment.  Priorities can and do
> change...
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Lyle KK7P
> >
> > > I hope Lyle will read this and perhaps be able to comment directly.
> >
> > __
> > Elecraft mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 73 de James K2QI
> President UNARC/4U1UN
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>



-- 
Gary
VK4FD - Motorhome Mobile
http://www.qsl.net/vk4fd/
K3 #679, P3 #546
For everything else there's Mastercard!!!
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[James Sarte (K2QI)]

Hi Lyle!

Indeed, this is a very subjective issue. One issue though that many will
probably agree with me on is the decrease in audio fidelity whenever NR is
engaged; i.e. volume of speech drops in relation to NR.  Would it be
possible to alter the algorithm to prevent this from happening?

It seems to me like the current NR algorithm reduces *everything* within the
passband, including spoken word.

73,
James K2QI

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Lyle Johnson  wrote:

> Psycho-acoustics is fun!  Some people swear by the K3 NR, others swear
> at it :-)
>
> Making further changes to the K3 NR remains a possibility, but is not a
> particularly high priority at the moment.  Priorities can and do change...
>
> 73,
>
> Lyle KK7P
>
> > I hope Lyle will read this and perhaps be able to comment directly.
>
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>



-- 
73 de James K2QI
President UNARC/4U1UN
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[Lyle Johnson]

Psycho-acoustics is fun!  Some people swear by the K3 NR, others swear 
at it :-)

Making further changes to the K3 NR remains a possibility, but is not a 
particularly high priority at the moment.  Priorities can and do change...

73,

Lyle KK7P

> I hope Lyle will read this and perhaps be able to comment directly.

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[James Sarte (K2QI)]

Hello Group,

I went ahead and ordered another BHI ANEM module, but I still have high
hopes that the K3's NR performance will improve.  I believe one of the
biggest issues is related to audio fidelity when the NR is activated.  I
find myself having to turn up the AF gain in order to compensate for the
drop in speech volume when NR is on.  Doing so however increases the volume
of band noise which sort of mitigates any benefits the NR brought with it.
Think of it sort of as a see-saw where one is always adjusting one variable
to compensate for another.

I hope Lyle will read this and perhaps be able to comment directly.

Mni tnx es vy 73,
James K2QI

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:16 AM, James Sarte (K2QI) wrote:

> Hello Elecrafters,
>
> Regarding the issue of NR, I know this can be a touchy subject and most
> will say its very subjective.  This post isn't intended as a complaint or
> criticism.  Instead, I hope through constructive discussions, more
> improvements to the K3's NR performance will be realized. I'd like to begin
> by saying that Lyle and crew have a done a fantastic job to date with the
> K3's NR.  I've had the privilege of watching the K3's NR function improve
> over time.  The boys at Aptos should really be commended for listening to
> their customers.
>
> With that said, the recent CQSS has made me realize that there is still
> room for improvement.  During the SS, I used NR extensively in combination
> with RF gain and filter hi-cut/lo-cut/shift settings.  NR when used in
> combination with the aforementioned K3 adjustments can and does work well.
>  The problem that I believe remains however is the algorithm used still
> seems too broad in its rejection calculations; what I mean is that SSB
> settings (i.e. F5-1 and higher) don't seem to be selective enough to reduce
> noise while allowing speech patterns to remain unaffected.  In other words,
> the DSP sounds like its reducing everything within its passband.  To my
> ears, the NR doesn't seem to make speech "pop out" quite as effectively has
> other NR implementations.  This can be seen by a not-so-subtle reduction in
> speech volume whenever the NR is turned on.   The NR behavior is consistent
> regardless of AGC slope or threshold settings.
>
> Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own.  It
> is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3.  I
> should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR performance.
>
> These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off.
>  These recordings are found on W4RT's website
>
> 20 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
>
> I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
> which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as the
> ANEM.
>
> Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
> easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get as
> affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the ANEM
> is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
> believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
> background noise while leaving speech unaffected.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
> Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your
> ideas/suggestions.
> 
> --
> 73 de James K2QI
> President UNARC/4U1UN
>
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[Johnny Siu]

Yes, there are a few occasions when the NR in my K3 is effective.   However, 
there are indeed far many occasions when I have to massage around the 4 x 8 = 
32 
settings and I do not find it easy to identify one to suit the then situation.

On the other hands, I simply set the NR knot at 10-11 o'clock in my Icom 
families.  This will suit 90% of the situation with little artifact and less 
listening fatigue.
 cheers, 


Johnny VR2XMC 



- 郵件原件 
寄件人﹕ The Smiths 
收件人﹕ w4...@carolina.rr.com; Elecraft Reflector 
傳送日期﹕ 2010/11/29 (一) 1:26:29 PM
主題： Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance


I have to disagree.  I have serious QRM at my location and when I use settings 
2-5 with Med 2 IF on my NR, it cleans up ALL of the electrical noise in my 
area.  I ALWAYS drop at least 3 S-Units of noise each time I turn mine on.  
However, if there can be even more improvement than I'm all for it.

T. Smith

> From: w4...@carolina.rr.com
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 16:27:56 -0500
> Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance
> 
> I have two K3s and the NR is the same on both. If I had to identify a feature 
>on the K3 that needs improvement, I would have to say it is the NR. I cannot 
>find a noise reduction setting that is suitable to me. I realize this is a 
>subjective, and you would have to compare the K3s noise reduction with that of 
>another radio. I have owned the Ten-Tec Omni VII which in my opinion has the 
>best NR on SSB without a doubt. I believe it is all in the NR programming and 
>how the algorithms are set up. There has been considerable improvement from 
>the 
>time the K3 was introduced, but I believe there is still room for further 
>improvement. I would like to see noise reduction with a minimum loss of signal 
>fidelity. Roy Morris W4WFB
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
                        
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



  
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Micheal,

>> First off I would like to point out to the group that Joe has just
>> proven one thing.. He is nothing more than a common BULLY. Plain
>> and simple.

It is you who has acted like a bully for quite some time here - and
previously on multiple other equipment specific e-mail lists - all
the time hiding behind this "privacy" nonsense.  The policy of this
list has been to include the poster's real name and call sign but I
don't see that you have done that once in all the time you've been
here.  Instead, you use a pseudonym that is about as generic as "J.
Doe" and claim to be an SWL while all the time picking fights with
those who don't agree with your view of the world ... or who point
out that what you say is quite simply and factually incorrect.

It is quite obvious that you do not care to be identified with your
remarks or take any responsibility for them ... otherwise you would
not try to hide behind some curtain with an assumed name, no call
and a "hotmail" e-mail account.

>> I believe that action against Joe should be taken at this time.

Now, who is the *real* bully?  If the emperor has no clothes, it is
time someone stepped up and said so.  You simply act like one who
leaves an IED on the information super-highway or lobs RPGs into a
public square from a hillside a few km away.  Your behavior does
nothing to improve information sharing or or encourage polite
conversation.

>> This harrasment MUST stop.

Agreed!  Stop harassing the members of the is list; act like a man,
take responsibility for what you post and sign your e-mail with your
real name and call (or find another sandbox willing to play by your
"rules").

... Joe, W4TV


On 11/29/2010 4:48 PM, The Smiths wrote:
>
> First off I would like to point out to the group that Joe has just proven one 
> thing.. He is nothing more than a common BULLY. Plain and simple.
>
> Second, whether this is my information or not, it is not your place to be 
> posting someone's personal information on the reflector. I'm not sure who 
> made you the police of this group, but it's very unbecoming.  I feel sorry 
> for you Joe. You're so damaged that you need to make unprovoked posts like 
> this.  I hope that the readers of this reflector see just how disrespectful, 
> rude and self serving you are.  You're nothing more than a person that likes 
> to cause conflict with others unprovoked. I hope Eric sees this, and he bans 
> you from the reflector for your inconsideration.
>
> Nothing in my post below refers to you, or even has any negative remarks that 
> would affect others.  As matter of fact, I just simply tried to help the 
> other by pointing out that settings 2-5 with Medium 2 IF helps the NB work 
> better.  Yet somehow you feel this has caused you so much grief that you need 
> to start a campaign to discredit, expose and bully others.  I truly feel 
> sorry for you.
>
> Now, if you feel that this N6MQL IS me, than fine.  I see that Jim Rogers has 
> posted that information earlier, where he got that I don't know.  However, 
> I'm sure that N6MQL wouldn't be to happy that you've accused him of 
> something, then gone on to post his personal information on the group 
> regardless.  I hope you're happy with your actions, and that you feel good 
> about yourself now.
> I believe that action against Joe should be taken at this time.  Enough is 
> enough. This harrasment MUST stop.
>
>
> T. Smith
>
>
>> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 15:09:55 -0500
>> From: li...@subich.com
>> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance
>>
>>
>> Where is your real name and call as required by the list policy?
>>
>> N6MQL
>> ARETSKY, MICHAEL A
>> 5543 TIERRA GARDENS LN
>> CARMICHAEL, CA 95608
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/29/2010 12:26 AM, The Smiths wrote:
>>>
>>
>>> I have to disagree. I have serious QRM at my location and when I use
>> settings 2-5 with Med 2 IF on my NR, it cleans up ALL of the electrical
>> noise in my area. I ALWAYS drop at least 3 S-Units of noise each time I
>> turn mine on. However, if there can be even more improvement than I'm
>> all for it.
>>
>>> T. Smith
>>>
>>>> From: w4...@carolina.rr.com
>>>> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>>>> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 16:27:56 -0500
>>>> Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance
>>>>
>>>> I have two K3s and the NR is the same on both. If I had to identify a 
>>>> feature on the K3 that needs improvement, I would have to say it is the 
>>>> NR. I cannot find a nois

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft]

Clarification on #3:

3. It is -not- appropriate to use a false name, or -false- callsign, or to post
anonymously.

Eric
Elecraft Moderator
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft]

Michael and Joe,

Please refrain from posting any more emails to the list regarding how 
another is mis-identified, or verbally attacking one another. It is not 
appropriate to argue this out here, and it is outside of list guidelines 
to -ever- verbally attack another person here.

As moderator, please notify me if you have concerns or problems.  There 
is only one moderator. Please do not attempt to moderate the list 
yourself. :-)

Lastly, let me clarify the posting identification standard for the list. 
This is a hosted forum, and we want to keep all of the interaction 
between everyone friendly and cordial. From past experience, anonymous 
postings generally do not support friendly interaction in a group this 
large.

1. Please identify yourself by your real name. First name only is OK.

2. If you have a callsign, please include it in the posting or from: field.
 (first Name/Callsign can be in your from: field or in the body of 
the message.)

3. It is -not- appropriate to use a false name, or callsign, or to post 
anonymously.

We moderate this list with a very light hand and generally do not 
over-zealously or rigidly enforce the list standards. We have a lot of 
much more urgent items to deal with here daily getting new products out 
the door to everyone :-)  Guys, this is a hobby for most list members - 
please do not push this issue any further.

Also, remember, anyhting you post is archived on the net for eternitiy 
for both your family, friends, employers etc to see..

73, Eric  WA6HHQ
Elecraft List Moderator


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[David Herring]

So, as a matter of curiosity and not defending anyone's behavior or meaning to 
stir up trouble, how is it that we have come to know T. Smith's identity as 
N6MQL?

David 
AH6TD

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 29, 2010, at 10:09 AM, "Joe Subich, W4TV"  wrote:

> 
> Where is your real name and call as required by the list policy?
> 
> N6MQL
> ARETSKY, MICHAEL A
> 5543 TIERRA GARDENS LN
> CARMICHAEL, CA 95608
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/29/2010 12:26 AM, The Smiths wrote:
>> 
> 
>> I have to disagree. I have serious QRM at my location and when I use
> settings 2-5 with Med 2 IF on my NR, it cleans up ALL of the electrical
> noise in my area. I ALWAYS drop at least 3 S-Units of noise each time I
> turn mine on. However, if there can be even more improvement than I'm
> all for it.
> 
>> T. Smith
>> 
>>> From: w4...@carolina.rr.com
>>> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>>> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 16:27:56 -0500
>>> Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance
>>> 
>>> I have two K3s and the NR is the same on both. If I had to identify a 
>>> feature on the K3 that needs improvement, I would have to say it is the NR. 
>>> I cannot find a noise reduction setting that is suitable to me. I realize 
>>> this is a subjective, and you would have to compare the K3s noise reduction 
>>> with that of another radio. I have owned the Ten-Tec Omni VII which in my 
>>> opinion has the best NR on SSB without a doubt. I believe it is all in the 
>>> NR programming and how the algorithms are set up. There has been 
>>> considerable improvement from the time the K3 was introduced, but I believe 
>>> there is still room for further improvement. I would like to see noise 
>>> reduction with a minimum loss of signal fidelity. Roy Morris W4WFB
>>> __
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>>> 
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> 
>> __
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> 
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> 
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Where is your real name and call as required by the list policy?

 N6MQL
 ARETSKY, MICHAEL A
 5543 TIERRA GARDENS LN
 CARMICHAEL, CA 95608



On 11/29/2010 12:26 AM, The Smiths wrote:
>

> I have to disagree. I have serious QRM at my location and when I use
settings 2-5 with Med 2 IF on my NR, it cleans up ALL of the electrical
noise in my area. I ALWAYS drop at least 3 S-Units of noise each time I
turn mine on. However, if there can be even more improvement than I'm
all for it.

> T. Smith
>
>> From: w4...@carolina.rr.com
>> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 16:27:56 -0500
>> Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance
>>
>> I have two K3s and the NR is the same on both. If I had to identify a 
>> feature on the K3 that needs improvement, I would have to say it is the NR. 
>> I cannot find a noise reduction setting that is suitable to me. I realize 
>> this is a subjective, and you would have to compare the K3s noise reduction 
>> with that of another radio. I have owned the Ten-Tec Omni VII which in my 
>> opinion has the best NR on SSB without a doubt. I believe it is all in the 
>> NR programming and how the algorithms are set up. There has been 
>> considerable improvement from the time the K3 was introduced, but I believe 
>> there is still room for further improvement. I would like to see noise 
>> reduction with a minimum loss of signal fidelity. Roy Morris W4WFB
>> __
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>   
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Improvement

[Dan Atchison]

 I'd have to agree with you, Roy.

In a moment of weakness many months ago, I purchased an IC-7600.  While it's a 
nice radio, it is NOT a K3 nor would I ever use it in a contest or try fighting 
a pile-up with it (unless it was the only radio available).  That said, with 
all the 7600's lackluster features, the Noise Reduction (NR) on the ICOM far, 
even greatly exceeds the NR in the K3.  The noise reduction itself, the quality 
of (remaining) signal (QoS), and its ease of use is a marvel and my benchmark 
NR behavior.  While in the K3 you can usually find a decent NR setting, by no 
means is it easily configurable with it's convoluted algorithm scheme nor is 
the resultant QoS as clean.

My opinion only; YMMV.

73,
Dan -- N3ND



 
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 16:27:56 -0500
From: "Roy Morris" 
Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance
To: 


I have two K3s and the NR is the same on both.  If I had to identify a feature 
on the K3 that needs improvement, I would have to say it is the NR.  I cannot 
find a noise reduction setting that is suitable to me.  I realize this is a 
subjective, and you would have to compare the K3s noise reduction with that of 
another radio.  I have owned the Ten-Tec Omni VII which in my opinion has the 
best NR on SSB without a doubt.  I believe it is all in the NR programming and 
how the algorithms are set up.  There has been considerable improvement from 
the 
time the K3 was introduced, but I believe there is still room for further 
improvement.  I would like to see noise reduction with a minimum loss of signal 
fidelity.Roy Morris  W4WFB


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[k2qi . nyc]

NB works well... It's the NR that could use improvement. 

Tnx,
Jim K2QI
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-Original Message-
From: The Smiths 
Sender: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 05:26:29 
To: ; Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance


I have to disagree.  I have serious QRM at my location and when I use settings 
2-5 with Med 2 IF on my NR, it cleans up ALL of the electrical noise in my 
area.  I ALWAYS drop at least 3 S-Units of noise each time I turn mine on.  
However, if there can be even more improvement than I'm all for it.
 
T. Smith
 
> From: w4...@carolina.rr.com
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 16:27:56 -0500
> Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance
> 
> I have two K3s and the NR is the same on both. If I had to identify a feature 
> on the K3 that needs improvement, I would have to say it is the NR. I cannot 
> find a noise reduction setting that is suitable to me. I realize this is a 
> subjective, and you would have to compare the K3s noise reduction with that 
> of another radio. I have owned the Ten-Tec Omni VII which in my opinion has 
> the best NR on SSB without a doubt. I believe it is all in the NR programming 
> and how the algorithms are set up. There has been considerable improvement 
> from the time the K3 was introduced, but I believe there is still room for 
> further improvement. I would like to see noise reduction with a minimum loss 
> of signal fidelity. Roy Morris W4WFB
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
  
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[The Smiths]

I have to disagree.  I have serious QRM at my location and when I use settings 
2-5 with Med 2 IF on my NR, it cleans up ALL of the electrical noise in my 
area.  I ALWAYS drop at least 3 S-Units of noise each time I turn mine on.  
However, if there can be even more improvement than I'm all for it.
 
T. Smith
 
> From: w4...@carolina.rr.com
> To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 16:27:56 -0500
> Subject: [Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance
> 
> I have two K3s and the NR is the same on both. If I had to identify a feature 
> on the K3 that needs improvement, I would have to say it is the NR. I cannot 
> find a noise reduction setting that is suitable to me. I realize this is a 
> subjective, and you would have to compare the K3s noise reduction with that 
> of another radio. I have owned the Ten-Tec Omni VII which in my opinion has 
> the best NR on SSB without a doubt. I believe it is all in the NR programming 
> and how the algorithms are set up. There has been considerable improvement 
> from the time the K3 was introduced, but I believe there is still room for 
> further improvement. I would like to see noise reduction with a minimum loss 
> of signal fidelity. Roy Morris W4WFB
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
  
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3 Noise Reduction Performance

[Roy Morris]

I have two K3s and the NR is the same on both.  If I had to identify a feature 
on the K3 that needs improvement, I would have to say it is the NR.  I cannot 
find a noise reduction setting that is suitable to me.  I realize this is a 
subjective, and you would have to compare the K3s noise reduction with that of 
another radio.  I have owned the Ten-Tec Omni VII which in my opinion has the 
best NR on SSB without a doubt.  I believe it is all in the NR programming and 
how the algorithms are set up.  There has been considerable improvement from 
the time the K3 was introduced, but I believe there is still room for further 
improvement.  I would like to see noise reduction with a minimum loss of signal 
fidelity.Roy Morris  W4WFB
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[Johnny Siu]

Yes, there have been improvements in the DSP of K3.  One of the reasons of 
selling my K3#46 was the artifacts of the DSP.  I have recently acquired 
another 
K3 in the second hand market with later production. I do notice there have been 
improvements.

I am mainly a phone operator with ocassional digital mode at PACTOR 3.  
Among the 4 x 8 =32 selections in the NR, I find it difficult to get one 
effective among the 32 choices.  From my past and present experience of my Icom 
families, I know what are the limitations of NR.

I am looking for a simple but effective NR which can cut 'some of the noise' 
with least artifacts, and also easy to work with.  At this moment, I still 
prefer the NR in my Icoms.  Having said that, I know the smart guys 
in Elecraft will keep on improving the K3 so that hopefully we will have better 
performance in later version of firmware.
 cheers, 


Johnny VR2XMC 



- 郵件原件 
寄件人﹕ Ron D'Eau Claire 
收件人﹕ Elecraft 
傳送日期﹕ 2010/11/28 (日) 12:14:47 AM
主題： Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

This is a good example of just how subjective "improvement" can be. 

Sure, the "hash" is gone, but it's replaced by the "underwater" warbling
sound so common with highly processed audio. 

Personally, I find that warbling variation in the audio far less pleasant
than the noise. 

Ron AC7AC

-Original Message-
> 
> Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own.
It
> is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3.  I
> should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR
performance.
> 
> These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off.
These
> recordings are found on W4RT's website
> 
> 20 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/20Mband-ssb.wav>
> 80 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/80conv-ssb.wav>
> 80 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/80Mconv2-ssb.wav>
> 
> I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
> which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as
the
> ANEM.
> 
> Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
> easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get
as
> affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the
ANEM
> is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
> believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
> background noise while leaving speech unaffected.
> 
> What do you guys think?
> 
> Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your
ideas/suggestions.
> -- 
> 73 de James K2QI
> President UNARC/4U1UN

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



  
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[N2TK, Tony]

Hi James,
I know some don't agree with me on this, but I concur what you find. I know
it is being picky. But I still like the Icom's DSP set to a very low level.
It is not very aggressive at that setting and reduces the background noise
to make it less tiring on SSB. And yes the SSB NR has significantly improved
over time. Every year at Dayton I ask for something less aggressive than
F5-1and that doesn't reduce the audio.
Maybe I am not setting up the K3 properly that it seems to work for others?
I know I have made enough goofs with operating this rig and others.

I really do like the NR on CW.

And did I say how happy I am with the APF?

73,
N2TK, Tony
#311
#1435

-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of James Sarte (K2QI)
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 7:16 AM
To: Elecraft
Subject: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

Hello Elecrafters,

Regarding the issue of NR, I know this can be a touchy subject and most will
say its very subjective.  This post isn't intended as a complaint or
criticism.  Instead, I hope through constructive discussions, more
improvements to the K3's NR performance will be realized. I'd like to begin
by saying that Lyle and crew have a done a fantastic job to date with the
K3's NR.  I've had the privilege of watching the K3's NR function improve
over time.  The boys at Aptos should really be commended for listening to
their customers.

With that said, the recent CQSS has made me realize that there is still room
for improvement.  During the SS, I used NR extensively in combination with
RF gain and filter hi-cut/lo-cut/shift settings.  NR when used in
combination with the aforementioned K3 adjustments can and does work well.
 The problem that I believe remains however is the algorithm used still
seems too broad in its rejection calculations; what I mean is that SSB
settings (i.e. F5-1 and higher) don't seem to be selective enough to reduce
noise while allowing speech patterns to remain unaffected.  In other words,
the DSP sounds like its reducing everything within its passband.  To my
ears, the NR doesn't seem to make speech "pop out" quite as effectively has
other NR implementations.  This can be seen by a not-so-subtle reduction in
speech volume whenever the NR is turned on.   The NR behavior is consistent
regardless of AGC slope or threshold settings.

Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own.  It
is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3.  I
should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR performance.

These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off.  These
recordings are found on W4RT's website

20 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/20Mband-ssb.wav>
80 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/80conv-ssb.wav>
80 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/80Mconv2-ssb.wav>

I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as the
ANEM.

Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get as
affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the ANEM
is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
background noise while leaving speech unaffected.

What do you guys think?

Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your ideas/suggestions.
<http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/20Mband-ssb.wav>
-- 
73 de James K2QI
President UNARC/4U1UN
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[Dave Perry]

Rob,

NR can be very effective on SSB depending on conditions, but it takes some 
careful adjustments.  Try F7 through F8 settings and I also have to adjust 
Hi/Lo settings to improve readability of the audio.  You can often reduce 
the watery effect and greatly improve overall readability on a noisy night. 
Doesn't work all the time -- depending on QRN conditions.  I would say about 
80% of the time I can achieve a noticeable improvement using NR on SSB when 
the noise is high.  You're not trying to achieve best fidelity with this 
technique -- just improved readability.

Dave, N4QS

- Original Message - 
From: 
To: "James Sarte (K2QI)" 
Cc: "Elecraft" 
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance


> I'm still getting my sea legs on the K3 but NR seems to work really great
> on CW but on SSB, I can't use it. With it on, regardless of setting, it
> makes the channel sound "watery" (for lack of a better term). I have two
> K3s, and both sound alike  on phone with NR invoked. Maybe I don't have
> them adjusted properly, but I find the sound very disconcerting.
>
> Rob K6RB
>
>> Hello Elecrafters,
>>
>> Regarding the issue of NR, I know this can be a touchy subject and most
>> will
>> say its very subjective.  This post isn't intended as a complaint or
>> criticism.  Instead, I hope through constructive discussions, more
>> improvements to the K3's NR performance will be realized. I'd like to
>> begin
>> by saying that Lyle and crew have a done a fantastic job to date with the
>> K3's NR.  I've had the privilege of watching the K3's NR function improve
>> over time.  The boys at Aptos should really be commended for listening to
>> their customers.
>>
>> With that said, the recent CQSS has made me realize that there is still
>> room
>> for improvement.  During the SS, I used NR extensively in combination 
>> with
>> RF gain and filter hi-cut/lo-cut/shift settings.  NR when used in
>> combination with the aforementioned K3 adjustments can and does work 
>> well.
>>  The problem that I believe remains however is the algorithm used still
>> seems too broad in its rejection calculations; what I mean is that SSB
>> settings (i.e. F5-1 and higher) don't seem to be selective enough to
>> reduce
>> noise while allowing speech patterns to remain unaffected.  In other
>> words,
>> the DSP sounds like its reducing everything within its passband.  To my
>> ears, the NR doesn't seem to make speech "pop out" quite as effectively
>> has
>> other NR implementations.  This can be seen by a not-so-subtle reduction
>> in
>> speech volume whenever the NR is turned on.   The NR behavior is
>> consistent
>> regardless of AGC slope or threshold settings.
>>
>> Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own.
>> It
>> is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3. 
>> I
>> should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR
>> performance.
>>
>> These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off.
>> These
>> recordings are found on W4RT's website
>>
>> 20 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/20Mband-ssb.wav>
>> 80 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/80conv-ssb.wav>
>> 80 m SSB <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/80Mconv2-ssb.wav>
>>
>> I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
>> which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as
>> the
>> ANEM.
>>
>> Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
>> easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get
>> as
>> affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the
>> ANEM
>> is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
>> believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
>> background noise while leaving speech unaffected.
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>>
>> Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your
>> ideas/suggestions.
>> <http://www.w4rt.com/BHI/20Mband-ssb.wav>
>> --
>> 73 de James K2QI
>> President UNARC/4U1UN
>> __
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>>
&

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[Guy Olinger K2AV]

Hi James,

I'd have to say that your post and the links to what you consider
improvement firmly make the case for how subjective this is.  Some folks
simply cannot stand to listen to the "warbling" effect caused by the NR
algorithm moving around the center of the "passband" to match the speech
centers and reject the bands with noise only.  What you are asking for is
what they can't stand...  K2 NR has that sound.

The great problem of noise reduction design is the difference in the
individual GOALS of using NR.  For some, this is to remove the IRRITANT of
noise, and for others to remove the UNINTELLIGIBILITY caused by noise.  The
latter goal produces different methods than the former.  The former is
doomed from the start because people's hearing range differs with SOME wide
hearers intensely annoyed by high frequency noise, others used to listening
to 80 meter QRN in the summer may want reduction with ZERO loss of weak
signal, and others are very ANNOYED by reduction ARTIFACTS.

For me it's just like anything else going on in firmware, I hope Wayne works
on the stuff I want first, and that he keeps working on stuff.  My list does
not have NR improvement near the top.  That's because there is a limit to
what NR can do that does not mask very weak signals when it's on.  NB is
another story, and the t3-7 or t2-7 with sharp skirts effect on key clicks
has allowed me to copy many signals where copy was not otherwise possible.

I will have to agree with you on the volume issues, because I always NOTICE
it.  BUT, that falls in the IRRITANT category, not the INTELLIGIBILITY
category.  So I walk on by and wait for Lyle to figure out how to nullify
plasma noise.  I'm not holding my breath, but there really is a part of me
that thinks he might.

BTW, I turn NR *OFF* in contests, period.  There is not a single NR setting
that I cannot demonstrate a very weak signal loss, that occurs where the NR
starts to blend with the noise.  My ears, and everyone else's, will do a
better job than the NR at that point.  And particularly, now that we have
APF for CW, hearing that tiny peep is all the clue I need to zero in the APF
and get it out of the noise.  NR on, and I don't even know it is there.

I don't think anyone really knows (federal court worthy peer-reviewed
scientific proof) how our ears hear discrete signals that are blending in
the noise, but I have a suspicion.  How many reading this have been driving
home after a weekend CW contest and hear CW in the road noise?  Our brains
have some kind of heuristic anticipatory mechanism.  It's the very one that
allows me to copy the "QRP" in DL5QQ/QRP and struggle with the rest to my
utter annoyance as he sends the /QRP over and over again.  (Talk about
irritating.)

However it works, it is more effective than anything electronic by some
orders of magnitude, and NR strips out what makes it work at the very point
that the brain/ear makes the greatest difference. Others may disagree in a
contest, just because they want to operate in comfort.  That's fine by me,
just don't apply for a seat in our WFO NY4A efforts, where our getting ALL
the very weakest stuff is our score differential over the competion.  If you
work 2K+ contacts on 40m in the ARRL DX CW, you can be guaranteed that three
or four or five HUNDRED of those contacts are too-far-away QRP, radio-trash
crap antenna weak, or at the very edge of propagation where they hear your
1.5 kW above their noise, but their 100w and built-in -12 dB disadvantage
puts them firmly IN the noise.  Turning on NR in a CW contest can cost you
hundreds of QSO's at a competitive station.  ANYONE can work loud and medium
stations. Try hard and most can work moderately weak.  The last layer is
only solved by the human brain, and the SOUND of it is irritating and
tiring.

Our in-the-noise hearing is likely honed by millions of years hearing the
movement or breathing of a sabre-tooth tiger before it could spring.  In
that environment the "false positive" of my hearing CW in the road noise,
e.g. hearing a sabre-tooth when there really wasn't one, was easily
tolerated in favor of having one or two steps moving away before a real
tiger charged.

What a noise reduction designer is up against is nature honing something
absolutely essential for millions of years, vs analysis in a very limited
computing environment.  And up against a wild variation in customer taste
and tolerance for things audio.

I'd say that if a box makes something sound like you like it, don't toss it
until the new thing demonstrates what you like.  There is no natural law
that states that superior results for all problems will always be obtained
processing at IF in a K3.  They're doing it there because it fits in the
scheme of all they're trying to do, and the means is commercially limited.
On whole they've succeeded brilliantly, but there simply MUST be SOME things
they can't do as well that way.

73, Guy.

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:16 AM, James Sarte (K2QI) wrote:

> Hello Elecraft

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[k6rb]

I'm still getting my sea legs on the K3 but NR seems to work really great
on CW but on SSB, I can't use it. With it on, regardless of setting, it
makes the channel sound "watery" (for lack of a better term). I have two
K3s, and both sound alike  on phone with NR invoked. Maybe I don't have
them adjusted properly, but I find the sound very disconcerting.

Rob K6RB

> Hello Elecrafters,
>
> Regarding the issue of NR, I know this can be a touchy subject and most
> will
> say its very subjective.  This post isn't intended as a complaint or
> criticism.  Instead, I hope through constructive discussions, more
> improvements to the K3's NR performance will be realized. I'd like to
> begin
> by saying that Lyle and crew have a done a fantastic job to date with the
> K3's NR.  I've had the privilege of watching the K3's NR function improve
> over time.  The boys at Aptos should really be commended for listening to
> their customers.
>
> With that said, the recent CQSS has made me realize that there is still
> room
> for improvement.  During the SS, I used NR extensively in combination with
> RF gain and filter hi-cut/lo-cut/shift settings.  NR when used in
> combination with the aforementioned K3 adjustments can and does work well.
>  The problem that I believe remains however is the algorithm used still
> seems too broad in its rejection calculations; what I mean is that SSB
> settings (i.e. F5-1 and higher) don't seem to be selective enough to
> reduce
> noise while allowing speech patterns to remain unaffected.  In other
> words,
> the DSP sounds like its reducing everything within its passband.  To my
> ears, the NR doesn't seem to make speech "pop out" quite as effectively
> has
> other NR implementations.  This can be seen by a not-so-subtle reduction
> in
> speech volume whenever the NR is turned on.   The NR behavior is
> consistent
> regardless of AGC slope or threshold settings.
>
> Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own.
> It
> is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3.  I
> should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR
> performance.
>
> These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off.
> These
> recordings are found on W4RT's website
>
> 20 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
>
> I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
> which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as
> the
> ANEM.
>
> Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
> easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get
> as
> affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the
> ANEM
> is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
> believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
> background noise while leaving speech unaffected.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
> Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your
> ideas/suggestions.
> 
> --
> 73 de James K2QI
> President UNARC/4U1UN
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[Ron D'Eau Claire]

This is a good example of just how subjective "improvement" can be. 

Sure, the "hash" is gone, but it's replaced by the "underwater" warbling
sound so common with highly processed audio. 

Personally, I find that warbling variation in the audio far less pleasant
than the noise. 

Ron AC7AC

-Original Message-
> 
> Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own.
It
> is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3.  I
> should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR
performance.
> 
> These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off.
These
> recordings are found on W4RT's website
> 
> 20 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
> 
> I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
> which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as
the
> ANEM.
> 
> Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
> easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get
as
> affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the
ANEM
> is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
> believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
> background noise while leaving speech unaffected.
> 
> What do you guys think?
> 
> Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your
ideas/suggestions.
> -- 
> 73 de James K2QI
> President UNARC/4U1UN

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[Geoffrey Mackenzie-Kennedy]

Hello James,

I use a BHI ANEM Mk II with my K2, and get similar results.

My K2 does not have the Noise Blanker installed nor the DSP, one reason 
being that man-made noise at this quiet rural location was never a problem. 
But, about two years ago some new neighbours arrived armed with some device 
that generates RFI, which I think is something used in their kitchen, maybe 
a blender - hence the purchase of the BHI which solved this noise problem 
when using the K2.

The NR in my Perseus SDR performs well, but not quite as well as the BHI - 
but that is an impression.

The usual disclaimers apply.

73,

Geoff
GM4ESD



On November 27, 2010, at 12:16 PM, James Sarte (K2QI) wrote:




> Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own. 
> It
> is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3.  I
> should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR 
> performance.
>
> These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off. 
> These
> recordings are found on W4RT's website
>
> 20 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
>
> I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
> which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as 
> the
> ANEM.
>
> Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
> easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get 
> as
> affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the 
> ANEM
> is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
> believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
> background noise while leaving speech unaffected.


__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[vr2xmc]

Hi James

I concur with your observations and let us have an open minded discussion here. 

Johnny vr2xmc

Sent from my  iPhone 4

"James Sarte (K2QI)"  於 2010年11月27日 下午8:16 寫道：

> Hello Elecrafters,
> 
> Regarding the issue of NR, I know this can be a touchy subject and most will
> say its very subjective.  This post isn't intended as a complaint or
> criticism.  Instead, I hope through constructive discussions, more
> improvements to the K3's NR performance will be realized. I'd like to begin
> by saying that Lyle and crew have a done a fantastic job to date with the
> K3's NR.  I've had the privilege of watching the K3's NR function improve
> over time.  The boys at Aptos should really be commended for listening to
> their customers.
> 
> With that said, the recent CQSS has made me realize that there is still room
> for improvement.  During the SS, I used NR extensively in combination with
> RF gain and filter hi-cut/lo-cut/shift settings.  NR when used in
> combination with the aforementioned K3 adjustments can and does work well.
> The problem that I believe remains however is the algorithm used still
> seems too broad in its rejection calculations; what I mean is that SSB
> settings (i.e. F5-1 and higher) don't seem to be selective enough to reduce
> noise while allowing speech patterns to remain unaffected.  In other words,
> the DSP sounds like its reducing everything within its passband.  To my
> ears, the NR doesn't seem to make speech "pop out" quite as effectively has
> other NR implementations.  This can be seen by a not-so-subtle reduction in
> speech volume whenever the NR is turned on.   The NR behavior is consistent
> regardless of AGC slope or threshold settings.
> 
> Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own.  It
> is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3.  I
> should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR performance.
> 
> These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off.  These
> recordings are found on W4RT's website
> 
> 20 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
> 80 m SSB 
> 
> I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
> which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as the
> ANEM.
> 
> Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
> easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get as
> affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the ANEM
> is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
> believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
> background noise while leaving speech unaffected.
> 
> What do you guys think?
> 
> Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your ideas/suggestions.
> 
> -- 
> 73 de James K2QI
> President UNARC/4U1UN
> __
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Elecraft] K3: noise reduction performance

[James Sarte (K2QI)]

Hello Elecrafters,

Regarding the issue of NR, I know this can be a touchy subject and most will
say its very subjective.  This post isn't intended as a complaint or
criticism.  Instead, I hope through constructive discussions, more
improvements to the K3's NR performance will be realized. I'd like to begin
by saying that Lyle and crew have a done a fantastic job to date with the
K3's NR.  I've had the privilege of watching the K3's NR function improve
over time.  The boys at Aptos should really be commended for listening to
their customers.

With that said, the recent CQSS has made me realize that there is still room
for improvement.  During the SS, I used NR extensively in combination with
RF gain and filter hi-cut/lo-cut/shift settings.  NR when used in
combination with the aforementioned K3 adjustments can and does work well.
 The problem that I believe remains however is the algorithm used still
seems too broad in its rejection calculations; what I mean is that SSB
settings (i.e. F5-1 and higher) don't seem to be selective enough to reduce
noise while allowing speech patterns to remain unaffected.  In other words,
the DSP sounds like its reducing everything within its passband.  To my
ears, the NR doesn't seem to make speech "pop out" quite as effectively has
other NR implementations.  This can be seen by a not-so-subtle reduction in
speech volume whenever the NR is turned on.   The NR behavior is consistent
regardless of AGC slope or threshold settings.

Below are several links to audio recordings of a product I used to own.  It
is called the BHI ANEM (Mk. II). Sadly, I sold it after getting the K3.  I
should have hung on to it as it has become my benchmark for NR performance.

These are some sample recordings of the ANEM being turned on and off.  These
recordings are found on W4RT's website

20 m SSB 
80 m SSB 
80 m SSB 

I've also compared the K3's NR performance to that of the Icom 756 Pro 3
which has similar NR reduction properties - albeit not as effective - as the
ANEM.

Perhaps I am being subjective or overly critical, but one thing you can
easily notice with the ANEM recordings is that speech volume doesn't get as
affected as the K3s.  This is really surprising to me as the NR for the ANEM
is AF rather than IF like what's used in our radios.  This leads me to
believe that the ANEM's NR algorithms are more effective in reducing
background noise while leaving speech unaffected.

What do you guys think?

Sorry for the long email. Many thanks in advance for your ideas/suggestions.

-- 
73 de James K2QI
President UNARC/4U1UN
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction tutorial/primer available?

[The Smiths]

Some of you were interested in what the Filters and such did on the K3 so I 
wrote this little bit of information up to help you out. I hope you find it 
useful. If you have any questions feel free to ask off the reflector. Thanks;
 
In brief:
 
Notch:
 
The Notch has an Auto (for SSB use) and a manual setting for CW. This can be 
used to take out a tone (carrier) or other noise that is sitting in the middle 
or near your pass band area (the freq. you're listening to). It can also be 
used in CW mode to reduce the amount of noise you hear in the upper or lower 
part of the pass band area. Setting it up to do this takes SOME understanding 
of what a notch filter does, and how to adjust it. You may not hear any 
difference between having it on, and off depending on the noise, and on the 
settings that you have selected. Along with turning it on you also have to 
adjust the Freq. manually when using it in CW mode.
Sometimes Notching out (CUTTING out) a selected signal can help with reception. 
For example if you are on CW and you have a lot of LOW end rumbling in 
headphones and you want to get rid of it, depending on your PITCH freq. you can 
turn on the NOTCH filter and set it to 300Hz for example. This will NOTCH out 
(cut out) all of the sound on and around the 300Hz freq. area. 
One thing you have to watch out for is setting the Notch freq in the menu to 
match, or come too close to your PITCH freq. If you do you will have 
essentially Notched out your Target freq that you're listening for. Not good.
 
 
 
NR:
 
The NR is used to reduce noise. As you've noticed it has settings as well. 
Settings 1-1 through 4-1 are normally used with CW, because of the "long 
hallway" effect that you've already experienced on SSB. Settings 5-1 through 
8-4 are generally used with SSB because they don't tend to cause this kind of 
effect on the voices.
You should always try to use the LEAST (or lowest) NR value you can IE 5-1 or 
1-1... If it helps at 1-1 and is good enough, there is no need to process more 
than you need. Too much of ANYTHING is a bad thing.
 
Even though it wasn't mentioned in the original question, the RF gain is 
another one of your BEST noise reducing tools you have... When used in 
conjunction with the NR filter, if you reduce your RF gain down to 4 or even 5 
bars on the scale when the nose on 40 is 4 bars high (as you indicated it was) 
you will notice that your NR works exponentially better! This is because the 
DSP no longer has to process nearly as much noise along with signal.
Don't worry, you will find that even when you turn the RF gain down on a signal 
that is S5 along with an S4 (4 bars) noise level you will NOT make the signal 
you're listening for go away. Just turn it down slowly as to hear when the 
person starts to get too low. If you start reducing their signal by more than 
the NR is reducing your noise level you know you've gone too far. You'll have 
to play around with this one some.. It's all about technique. 
Keep in mind that it may take 10 seconds or so before your NR starts to clean 
up the noise as you drop the RF gain, so try only dropping it as much as 1 bar 
less than the noise level at first, if you need to drop the RF gain lower then 
go ahead and then listen again for a few second more.
 
 
NB:
 
The NB generally works for Electrical noise and other pulsing type noises... 
You have already noticed that when you turn it on it can drop your S meter by 
as much as 1 S unit. With the proper settings (DSP/IF) you may be able to get 
that down to as much as 3 S units (bars) of noise reduction. However, keep in 
mind, with the reduction of noise with this method you will also have adverse 
affects on the signals you're trying to listen to. Such as a clicky sound on 
the CW tones, or flutter on a voice.
Again, like the NR you always want to use as little as you can get away with. 
Starting with the lower numbers for DSP, and the Narrow modes for IF.
Just for a starting spot, in my area I find that 2-5 with Med 2 seems to work 
very well at reducing the QRM/QRN. However, if I move it to 2-7, Med 2 I find 
that the noise level drops down 3 bars, but trying the have a QSO with a weak 
station is almost impossible. As well as the noise it tends to "remove" the 
sender as well.
Try NOT to use your S meter as your gauge of where you should have your NB set 
to. For example, Turn off the IF NB, start with the DSP (because this seems to 
work best at removing noise) Next, Close your eyes and start to VERY slowly 
turn the DSP part of the NB starting at the lowest number (setting). LISTEN to 
when the noise is reduced to your satisfaction. It may take some going back and 
forth to get this right, or even hear a difference. When you are done, if you 
are not completely satisfied with the noise reduction continue this process 
using the IF part of the settings. Keep the DSP portion exactly where you found 
it to work best. When you find the best IF noise reduction you will have your 

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction tutorial/primer available?

[Edward R Cole]

Don,

Thanks for the references.  Many of us were not on this reflector or 
even owned a K3 in 2009 so would not know.  I am printing this off 
for future reference when I am ready to investigate NR/NB more thoroughly.

73, Ed - KL7UW

---
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 15:00:26 -0400
From: Don Wilhelm 
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction tutorial/primer available?
To: w0...@aol.com
Cc: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Message-ID: <4c3771ca.1010...@embarqmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

There was "straight talk" about NR from Lyle Johnson (who designed and
implemented the algorithms) in his reflector posts of 8/25/09 and
8/27/09 as well as the information in the Firmware Release Notes for
version 3.30 (avaliable using the K3 Utility Help pulldown).
Page 25 of the K3 manual has a comprehensive description of the tools
available  - Reducing Interference and Noise section.
The manual content is Wayne's work, so those who know most about those
implementations have already spoken.
I am not certain how much more authoritative information you are seeking.
As far as explicit "Here is how you use it" - each individual case or
instance of noise is different and will require different treatment.
Each user will have to cycle through the settings available to see which
works best - the result is a compromise, there is little that can move a
signal out of the noise and provide a completely distortion-free and
clear copy signal - copy will be improved, but just how much is improved
and how much distortion is tolerable is a question each operator must
answer.

73,
Don W3FPR



73, Ed - KL7UW, WD2XSH/45
==
BP40IQ   500 KHz - 10-GHz   www.kl7uw.com
EME: 144-QRT*, 432-100w, 1296-QRT*, 3400-fall 2010
DUBUS Magazine USA Rep dubus...@hotmail.com
==
*temp 

__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Re: [Elecraft] K3: Noise reduction tutorial/primer available?

[Don Wilhelm]

Gary,

Have you read column 2 of page 25 in the manual?
What it says is very close to what you have requested - except for 
explicitly stating that 'some experimentation is required'.
It does say which noise sources the IF Noise Blanker is better suited 
for, and which the DSP Noise Blanker attacks more readily.
Further down, it states that the more aggressive NR settings will make 
the signal sound "hollow".

I don't know just how much more information would be meaningful.  There 
is no one setting that works best for any one type of noise all the time 
- how far the noise source is from your antenna and how it propagates 
are additional variables.  A "recipe" for any particular situation could 
become quite complex.  To be a valid chart the noise characteristics 
would have to be expressed in terms of the rise time, duration, and fall 
times of the noise present *at* the K3 input (not at the source of 
noise).  It makes no sense to me to attach the antenna feedline to a 
spectrum analyzer to determine the characteristics of the noise before 
selecting which one to use on the K3.  I think it much easier just to 
try the various settings (given the guidelines already in the manual) 
and find which one sounds best to your ears at that particular time - 
most likely the "best" will be different tomorrow because the signal 
affects the best choice as well as the noise type, and the signal will 
change with propagation changes too.

73,
Don W3FPR

Gary Dezern wrote:
> At least for myself, it would be useful to have a paragraph or two that could 
> be titled "K3 NB and NR for Dummies" and might look something like this:
>
> Each operator and location will experience unique noise sources and 
> conditions.  In order to best use the NB and NR tools, a certain amount of 
> experimenting is required.  That being said, here are some general guidelines 
> for using NB and NR tools under very "generic" situations.  Each operator 
> will have to play around with these settings for their own situation!
>
> NB:
>
> Lightning noise:   (?)
> Power line noise:  
> XYL is vacuuming the house:  ?
> Plasma TV noise:
>
> NR:
>
> Unlike the NB system, the NR tools are for combating random noise of an 
> unknown (or random) source.  In this case, a starting place for using the 
> tool might be easier based on mode rather than source:
>
> SSB:    (my favorite is 5-1)
> CW:  ???
> DATA:  OFF
>
>   
>
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html